energy mapping study - special · energy mapping study ... calgary staff to evaluate the link...

December 19, 2008

Energy Mapping Study

Submitted to: City of Calgary December 19, 2008 Prepared by: Canadian Urban Institute 555 Richmond St. W., Suite 402 PO Box 612 Toronto ON M5V 3B1 Canada Tel: 416‐365‐0816 Fax: 416‐365‐0650 [email protected] www.canurb.com


December 19, 2008


Report Team

Canadian Urban Institute Glenn R. Miller, Director (Education & Research), FCIP, RPP John Warren, CUI Senior Associate, P.Eng. Brent Gilmour, Project Manager (Education & Research), M.Sc.Pl. Juan Carlos Molina, GIS Specialist, B.A. (Hons.), Agricultural Engineering Simon Geraghty, Engineering Researcher, (Education & Research) Iain D. C. Myrans, Senior Researcher, (Education & Research), B.A.(Hons.), B.U.R.Pl.

Enermodal Engineering Ltd.

Matt Grace, Division Head, Calgary, B. Eng. (Hons), M.Sc, MIEMA, C.Env, LEED AP Adam Stoker, Sustainable Buildings Consultant, P.Eng., LEED AP

Decision Economics Consulting Group John Sedley, Principal, Resource Economist

Cover Photo Credits Terri Meyer Boake, School of Architecture, Univesity of Waterloo. Photo Sources The Vento, Busyby Perkins+Will p. 33 Mount Royal College Roderick Mah Centre for Continous Learning p. 33 Jamieson Place, Enermodal Engineering Ltd. p. 33


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface .................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 4

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 9

1.1 What is Energy Mapping? ................................................................................................................... 10

1.2 Integrated Energy Planning ................................................................................................................. 14

2 The Impact of Energy on Future Development – Why Is it Important? ....................................................... 16

3 Calgary’s GHG Goal – A Measure For Success .............................................................................................. 19

4 Local Energy Profile ...................................................................................................................................... 22

4.1 Provincial Energy Supply Overview ..................................................................................................... 22

4.2 Municipal Local Production ................................................................................................................. 23

5 Achieving Calgary’s GHG Goal Through The Built Environment ................................................................... 26

5.1 Benefits of Energy Efficiency ............................................................................................................... 26

5.2 Selecting A Building Efficiency Model ................................................................................................. 27

5.3 Energy Improvement Scenarios .......................................................................................................... 28

5.4 Applying Building Energy Improvements ............................................................................................ 33

6 The Need For Alternative Energy Sources .................................................................................................... 36

6.1 Energy Sources Reviewed for Calgary ................................................................................................. 36

6.2 Energy Sources Applicable to Calgary ................................................................................................. 43

7 Locating Alternative Energy Sources – Calgary Energy Map ........................................................................ 47

7.1 Energy Mapping Process ..................................................................................................................... 47

7.2 Calgary Energy Maps ........................................................................................................................... 48

7.3 A Review of Calgary Land uses ............................................................................................................ 53

7.4 Energy and Calgary Land Use Priorities ............................................................................................... 56

8 Overcoming Challenges To Implementing the Energy Map: Strategies and Policy Recommendations ....... 58

9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................... 66

Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................... 67

LIST OF TABLES Table 3‐1 Calgary Trends in Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990‐2003 .................................................................... 19 Table 4‐1 Existing and New Sources of Energy Generation in Calgary ................................................................. 23 Table 4‐2 Existing Energy Demand for Buildings In Calgary 2008 ........................................................................ 24

December 19, 2008

2 Energy Mapping Study

Table 4‐3 Forecasted Energy Demand For Buildings in Calgary 2036 Business As Usual ..................................... 25 Table 5‐1 Calgary Energy Map Building Study Typology ...................................................................................... 30 Table 5‐2 Scenario Reductions Overview For 2036 .............................................................................................. 30 Table 5‐3 GHG Increases for Calgary Built Environment ...................................................................................... 32 Table 5‐4 Potential Building Retrofit Actions ....................................................................................................... 34 Table 5‐5 Whole Building and Housing Energy Rating Equivalents ...................................................................... 35 Table 6‐1 GeoExchange GHG Reduction Potential ............................................................................................... 37 Table 6‐2 Solar Air GHG Reduction Potential ....................................................................................................... 38 Table 6‐3 Solar Hot Water GHG Reduction Potential ........................................................................................... 39 Table 6‐4 Energy Sharing GHG Reduction Potential ............................................................................................. 39 Table 6‐5 Sewer Heat Capture GHG Reduction Potential .................................................................................... 40 Table 6‐6 Photovoltaic GHG Reduction Potential ................................................................................................. 41 Table 6‐7 Biomass GHG Reduction Potential ....................................................................................................... 41 Table 6‐8 Wind Turbine GHG Reduction Potential ............................................................................................... 42 Table 6‐9 District Energy GHG Reduction Potential ............................................................................................. 43 Table 6‐10 District Energy With CHP GHG Reduction Potential ........................................................................... 43 Table 6‐11 Cost Per Tonne of C02 Diverted For Each Alternative Energy Source By 2036 ................................... 44 Table 6‐12 Alternative Energy Sources for Calgary By 2036 ................................................................................ 45 Table 6‐13 Summary of Measures Required to Meet Calgary’s 2036 GHG Goal for Buildings ............................ 46 Table 7‐1 Activity Centres Percentage Change New Building Type and GJ/ha ..................................................... 53 Table 7‐2 Corridor Percentage Change New Building Type and GJ/ha ................................................................ 54 Table 7‐3 Developed Percentage Change New Building Type and GJ/ha ............................................................. 55 Table 7‐4 Developing Percentage Change New Building Type and GJ/ha ............................................................ 55 Table 7‐5 Industrial Percentage Change New Building Type and GJ/ha ............................................................... 56

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1‐1 Energy Decision Making Approach ...................................................................................................... 12 Figure 1‐2 Integrating Land Use and Energy ........................................................................................................ 13 Figure 3‐1 Forecasted Population Growth and GHG emissions Business As Usual .............................................. 20 Figure 4‐1 Annual Energy Cost In Alberta Residential, Institutional and Commercial Buildings By End‐Use ....... 24 Figure 5‐1 Capital Investment vs. Energy Savings ................................................................................................ 31 Figure 5‐2 Forecasted Population Growth and GHG emissions Max Efficiency ................................................... 32 Figure 7‐1 Business As Usual Map 2036 ............................................................................................................... 49 Figure 7‐2 Ultra‐High Efficiency Scenario Map 2036 ............................................................................................ 50 Figure 7‐3 Location of Alternative Energy Sources Map 2036 ............................................................................. 52

APPENDICES Appendix A ― Impact of Climate Change in Canada ............................................................................................ 68 Appendix B ― Energy and Mapping Methodology .............................................................................................. 69 Appendix C ― MNECB Energy Efficiency Design Approach for Calgary Buildings ................................................ 75 Appendix D ― Energy Planning in Canada ........................................................................................................... 79 Appendix E ― Energy Model Financial Assessment ............................................................................................. 86

December 19, 2008


PREFACE As Canada’s leading applied urban policy institute dedicated to identifying, developing and delivering policy and planning solutions to enable urban regions to thrive and prosper, the Canadian Urban Institute is engaged in Canada’s movement to advance market transformation for sustainable communities and to encourage the application and integration of energy into the decision‐making process at the municipal level. The Institute believes that the development of greener buildings and communities provides a tangible way to have a productive conversation about sustainability issues, including energy, affecting urban regions across Canada. Since the Institute’s inception, the CUI has led a visionary program of research into the long‐term solutions for urban transportation and energy supply challenges.

In July of 2008, the Canadian Urban Institute with our partners, Enermodal Engineering and Decision Economics Consulting Ltd, were retained by the City of Calgary to undertake the Energy Mapping Study. The study is intended to provide clear direction to the City and inform the private sector about the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage the use of alternative energy systems through considerations such as the design of buildings and encouragement of more compact, mixed‐use and high density communities.

December 19, 2008


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Although Calgary is one of the fastest growing cities in Canada, its residents are deeply committed to preserving a sense of community and ensuring that the city is well positioned to be sustainable in every sense of the word. The imagineCalgary project has involved a record number of citizens in a long‐term planning initiative, which has focused ‐ among other priorities ‐ on how to achieve a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the face of continued high demand for new buildings and transportation facilities.

In response to imagineCalgary the municipal government introduced 11 Sustainability principles for land use and mobility. Principle 11 ‐ Use of Green Buildings and Infrastructure ‐ provided an intervention point and introduced the sustainable energy approach. The 11 Sustainability Principles form the basis of two new strategic plans ‐ the Municipal Development Plan and the Calgary Transportation Plan.

This energy mapping study, which was commissioned by the City of Calgary staff responsible for developing the Municipal Development Plan, provides insights into the challenges involved in meeting these goals with regards to the built environment, as well as recommendations for how best to proceed. The report does not review the importance of transportation on energy consumption for Calgary. The report addresses a broad range of topics, including the benefits of dealing directly with building efficiency, as well as the location of buildings.

One of the most valuable outcomes from undertaking the research and development necessary to produce this report has been the collaborative discussions with staff. The results of these interactions are summarized in the report, and taken together, describe the dimensions of the challenges ahead.

A key insight is that when examining the potential to retrofit the existing built environment, in terms of energy intensity, one energy source cannot necessarily be substituted for another. One of the popular misconceptions in the public debate about energy consumption and the laudable desire to adopt more “sustainable” practices, is that various forms of renewable energy such as wind power or solar hot water can simply meet the energy demands of today’s built environment. Most of Canada’s built environment is designed around energy provided by fossil fuels. Switching to alternative fuels is best achieved by lowering the energy demand of the built environment first. This approach contributes to not only reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but also improves the economic viability of alternative energy sources.

Taking an integrated design approach from the outset, which takes into consideration building orientation, building energy efficiency, placement, choice of materials and mechanical systems, provides the opportunity to build new buildings and develop new communities reliant on alternative fuels and to ensure that the energy from alternative sources is provided on a cost effective basis that minimizes

December 19, 2008


overall environmental emissions. Improved energy efficiency increases the uptake of alternative energy sources that have higher costs per unit of energy delivered, but encourage the overall cost of energy to be reduced through lower energy demand.

A second benefit summarized in this report is the value derived from depicting spatially the energy outputs from various land use scenarios. This will allow City of Calgary staff to evaluate the link between the future physical form of the city with the potential to shift the source of energy production to modes that provide the best fit between return on investment, opportunities to reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions and a land use pattern that meets the test of good planning. For the Centre City and Designated Activity centres, for example, map 7‐3 “Location of Alternative Energy Sources” clearly illustrates that a critical mass of development can be reliably served by district energy, while other land‐extensive, lower density forms of development as found in industrial parks are well suited to solar air and solar hot water heating.

Third, the process of modeling the economic cost of various forms of alternative energy as they relate to different types of built form and how these variables interact to create higher levels of building efficiency is also documented. Although the scale of the investment is large, when reviewed on a building by building basis, the costs of the opportunity to introduce improvements in energy efficiency are feasible, especially when considered over a 28 year period.

Fourth, meeting the greenhouse gas goal for the built environment requires taking action now. To put this in perspective, Calgary needs to achieve a reduction to 5,772kt/year in greenhouse gas emissions for buildings to meet the proposed community target of a 50 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2050. Achieving the greenhouse gas goal for the built environment requires accommodating in new buildings the expected increases in population and job growth. By acting decisively today, Calgary can avoid having to use more extensive measures in the future to address greenhouse gas emission challenges and will have a larger inventory of more efficient buildings.

Finally, the report identifies a range of tools to be developed by the City of Calgary that will facilitate the process of implementation and understanding between City staff, Council and stakeholders to achieve Calgary’s proposed community greenhouse gas target by integrating land use decisions and energy impacts.

This report establishes an integrated energy planning approach that draws on the use of quality urban energy systems and is built around three key themes:

• The first is to use energy efficiency improvements to serve as a catalyst to curb energy demand and reduce environmental risks;

• The second is to maximize alternative energy systems across Calgary; • The third is to use district energy with a combined heat and power system

as a means to not only manage the thermal needs of energy consumers at the building and at the community level, but to also apply it as an

December 19, 2008


approach to meet community planning objectives, such as the establishment of mixed use, compact communities.

This report sets out a series of recommendations and proposed strategies that can integrate energy issues into long‐range planning considerations for Calgary and encourage the faster uptake of energy efficiency improvements. The recommendations provided below are outlined here in summary format. A more detailed discussion of the recommendations is provided in Chapter 8, “Overcoming Challenges To Implementing the Energy Map: Strategies and Policy Recommendations.”

1. Integrate Energy Objectives into the Municipal Development Plan

The challenge: The official plan conveys expected policy directions and actions to staff and property owners that can translate into energy impacts. Incorporating energy decision‐making into land use decisions requires that all City of Calgary staff have confidence to undertake robust energy planning measures from day one.

The opportunity: It is incumbent on the City of Calgary to attempt to reshape its policies regarding energy issues in order to prepare the city for the expected increase in population growth and, in particular, limit the impact of energy consumption associated with new development.

2. Adopt and Implement the Energy Maps

The challenge: A major barrier to the application of alternate energy sources is the associated cost in terms of long term returns on investment and the challenge of coordinating planning among various agencies to advance alternative energy sources. Investors and users of alternative energy systems, such as district energy, require assurance that density targets will be met to ensure the economic viability of a system.

The opportunity: Incorporating energy issues into the planning process and municipal bylaws can increase the interagency cooperation in the delivery and development of energy and provide important market signals to investors and utilities about where to invest in alternative energy sources and building improvement programs.

Recommendation: The City of Calgary adopts the following energy principles within the Municipal Development Plan:

• Promote energy efficiency building design and practices for all building types, residential, commercial, institutional and industrial.

• Encourage planning, design and construction of energy efficient neighbourhoods and buildings to reduce energy consumption and to lower greenhouse gas emission, through policies to be incorporated into the plan.

• Minimize the physical separation of activities and to encourage development density that supports mass transportation and the application of district energy systems.

December 19, 2008


3. Encourage Higher Building Standards Using Indicators

The challenge: Growing importance is being placed upon the quality of cities by the general public and the practical policy implications of this fact suggest the need to develop appropriate information that can contribute to better decision making. Achieving Calgary’s building greenhouse gas objective requires monitoring how energy is used within a land use relative to the GJ/ha energy targets established. No city wide system is in place to assess the impact of land use decisions on energy use.

The opportunity: The City of Calgary can immediately begin to increase the level of awareness and importance of energy to property owners and developers by using non‐regulatory measures to monitor the energy performance of a building and how it relates to the GJ/ha energy targets for land uses.

4. Leverage Existing Incentive Programs

The Challenge: The most cited obstacle for energy efficiency improvements is the lack of expressed interest from clients and/or consumers. As with most viable products and concepts, market transformation (the process enabling a new product or concept to enter the mainstream through commercialization) can only be sustained when there is a clearly defined market to provide the necessary critical mass to normalize a practice.

The Opportunity: The goal for increasing the acceptance of energy efficiency activities is not to prescribe or over‐regulate a process. Calgary has the opportunity to leverage change in the market place that demands the application of energy

Recommendation: The City of Calgary adopts the ultra‐high efficiency scenario map and alternative energy sources map as part of the Municipal Development Plan. The maps should be updated from time to time, in keeping with the schedule for updating the Municipal Development Plan. Consideration should also be provided to developing a version of the maps for on‐line use to promote energy efficiency and conservation.

Recommendation: The City of Calgary undertakes to:

• Develop an energy certification process as part of the Land Use Bylaw to be submitted with applications for redesignation, subdivision, development permit or building permits that outlines the specific heat loss calculations and approaches to improve energy efficiency.

• Prepare a development, building and rezoning sustainability checklist that uses the GJ/ha metrics developed for each land use and the approach referenced in the Municipal Development Plan.

December 19, 2008


efficiency practices and ensures access to the necessary products, systems and techniques.

5. Work with the Community and Implement a Detailed Financial Implementation Strategy

The challenge: Although residents and businesses of Calgary might have expressed interest in reducing reliance on centralized energy, encouraging local alternative energy generation and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, commitment to supporting energy development can diminish when people are expected to pay for upgrades to private property or incur a “premium” cost for investments or the use of local alternative generated energy.

The opportunity: A review of other jurisdictions that have successfully implemented energy initiatives by adhering to the principles of an integrated urban energy system can encourage high‐quality, higher density development; generate jobs; add to the tax base; contribute to persuading car‐dependent commuters to use alternative transportation options; and achieve affordable energy self‐reliant communities fuelled by alternative energy sources. With firm planning controls, innovative regulations, and appropriate incentives, Calgary can use the energy maps to develop a visionary planning and investment strategy that places energy at the forefront of planning for the 21st century city. These elements would provide a major building block for a community energy plan.

Recommendation: The City of Calgary prepares a Community Energy Plan. The plan should undertake to:

• Develop a detailed financial implementation strategy for the Ultra‐High Efficiency Map and Alternative Energy Sources Map. The strategy should include the potential to use local improvement charges to accelerate energy efficiency building retrofits and improvements in new buildings.

• Develop detailed policy direction for achieving the GJ/ha metric prepared for each land use in area structure plans, community plans and area redevelopment plans.

• Provide an assessment of the regulatory authority required for the City of Calgary to administer higher levels of energy performance standards for all building applications.

• Prepare a comprehensive review of transportation emissions and identify the specific measures needed to achieve equivalent reductions in transportation to meet the 2050 GHG goal.

b i d

Recommendation: The City of Calgary advance the development of proposed incentives for encouraging green building for all building types (residential, commercial, institutional and industrial) and that the incentives be targeted towards land use areas that have the highest GJ/ha.

December 19, 2008


Keeping Fueled – Temporary Supply Disruption

In August of 2008, over 100 gas stations and backup generators ran out of gas across Alberta and British Columbia. In preparation for retooling Petro‐Canada’s refinery in Edmonton to accommodate the processing of crude and heavy oils from the Alberta oil sands, the refinery was expecting to shut down for 60 days, while its catalytic cracker continued to produce 135,000 barrels per day of fuel. Just as the rest of the plant prepared to close, the catalytic cracker experienced an unplanned outage. For nearly three weeks, 120 specialized workers repaired the unit, as hundreds of trucks were used to ship 200,000 liters per day of fuel from Vancouver to support gas stations. After a month of repairs, the fuel distribution in Alberta and B.C. was still “not out of woods.” Source: Globe and Mail. Petro‐Canada shortage leave pumps dry. August 22, 2008. Picture source: www.chemco‐elec.com

1 INTRODUCTION Across Canada, an increasing number of municipalities are engaged in the process of sustainable energy planning. The approach taken by each community is varied relative to their overall understanding of sustainability issues, planning capabilities and specific energy objectives. What is becoming evident is the importance of interconnecting urban form and land‐use with an understanding of energy consumption and supply issues. At the same time, there is an increased recognition that regardless of a municipality’s access to immediate fossil fuel sources, in the future inexpensive energy for use for hot water, space heating and cooling, transportation and electricity generation will be at a premium in the years ahead. It is also well understood that within the lifecycle of buildings and urban form being developed today, changes will be required in how we heat, cool and power built spaces and transport people. Municipal long‐range planning for maintaining and encouraging access to secure, affordable sources of energy will be required to ensure that a community maintains its economic attractiveness and competitiveness.

This report:

• Explains the impact of energy on land use decisions; • Examines the current sources of energy supply and expected energy

demand for Calgary; • Identifies the potential to reduce energy consumption and environmental

emissions in the built environment; • Explores the appropriate alternative energy sources for Calgary and

identifies the potential location for application; • Reviews cost implications for improving energy performance; and, • Outlines the challenges and a suggested course of action for implementing

the energy map with a focus on land use planning.

As a result of resource constraints, timing and a requirement to focus on access and application of alternative energy options, this report only addresses the energy related impact of the built environment. The report does not address the significance and importance of transportation on energy consumption for Calgary.

As part of the land use process underway for Plan It Calgary, there is an inherent focus to increase the use of an alternative transportation hierarchy that encourages land uses and urban form that reduces energy consumption by supporting walking and public transportation first and single automobile trips last. As the private vehicle can consume almost twice the energy per passenger per kilometre compared with a train and nearly four times that of a bus, the energy and associated pollution of an urban layout that supports the reduction in car use is central to meeting the City of Calgary goal’s of creating a healthier and more

December 19, 2008


liveable city, as well as meeting the proposed community greenhouse gas targets.1 This report complements an alternative transportation hierarchy and the subsequent reductions in energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions that can result from fewer trips.

1.1 WHAT IS ENERGY MAPPING?

Energy mapping works to provide municipalities and utilities with a way to evaluate existing energy use in a community and plan to improve energy efficiency through the use of better building standards and alternative energy sources. This approach builds on accepted practices for the reduction in energy use in efficient ways such as through reduced demand for transportation, and space heating and cooling. The mapping process also incorporates the idea that to maximize the energy efficiency of urban form requires going beyond integrating transportation issues, improvements to and orientation of the built environment, as well as ensuring that “unavoidable” energy needs are met in the most effective way possible, such as obtaining the highest and best use from a given primary‐energy input.2

Inputs to energy mapping work to maximize the amount of energy savings and reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from strategically planned community intensification, re‐urbanization and green field development. The mapping itself is the means by which these enhancements are communicated.

Relating Energy to Land Use Planning

There are two ways that municipalities can become involved in sustainable energy planning. One is directed at planning for and providing energy services directly. The other approach requires the development of energy policy that promotes responses to important, but non‐ energy municipal issues that happen to also promote energy sustainability. These issues can include affordable housing, taxation, traffic congestion, air quality, and infrastructure improvements. All of these municipal issues are also energy issues, because there are different ways to approach them that can result in very different levels of energy consumption, as well as types of energy supply.

Energy has generally been the purview of specialized agencies including local utilities (which have a regulated requirement to meet power demands) and provincial agencies acting in the interest of the community as a whole. In many ways, the planning community across Canada is actively involved with energy

1 Koen Steemers. 2003. “Energy and the city: density, buildings and transport.” Energy and Buildings Vol. 35 pp 3‐15. 2 The concept often used to refer to highest best use is Exergy. Exergy can be thought of as a measure of usefulness or quality or value of energy or matter. Exergy is generally defined as the maximum work which can be produced by a flow or system as it is brought into equilibrium with a reference environment.

December 19, 2008


Optimal Size of Generating Plants Since the early 1980s, advancements in centralized generation and transmission have slowed. Generally, larger‐scale power production plants, including coal fired‐systems, achieve low levels of energy efficiency anywhere from 30‐45 percent. This means that nearly two‐thirds of the energy produced during the combustion of a fuel is rejected into the atmosphere. At the same time, advancements in generating and rejected heat capture technologies have reduced costs through smaller scale distributed plants, such as district energy with CHP capacity and anaerobic digestion which can be located close to a community. Picture Source: Charles E. Bayless (1994). ”Less is More: Why Gas Turbines Will Transform Electric Utilities.” Public Utilities Fortnightly, Vol. 12(1).

management through the application and use of various principles of planning, such as new urbanism and smart growth.

These schools of urban thought have addressed air quality and GHG emissions associated with automobile use and have focused on establishing communities that support public transportation, capitalize on the use of existing infrastructure, encourage a healthier and more balanced lifestyle in terms of walking and activities that support the full life cycle by offering a range of housing.

The arrangement of land uses and the form of the built environment has an impact on intrinsic energy needs. For instance, a low‐density community tends to generate a higher demand for travel, while a high‐density community has a more compact pattern of mixed land uses that minimizes the separation of uses. Similarly, built form, such as ground‐oriented development or low‐rise apartments, can require less energy than a single detached house.

It is now understood that the design of urban form in terms of infrastructure and land use patterns, affect the energy throughput that influences demand for energy services. There are several reasons for this.

First, energy analysts have traditionally focused on energy policy efforts for buildings and equipment to apply demand side management measures that lower energy consumption or balance demand more efficiently. Today, analysts are closely examining the role of urban infrastructure and urban land use patterns to better determine energy consumption levels.3

A second reason is that energy use is now being related to environmental impacts associated in urban areas. For communities, the concern of better air quality is linked to the specific energy related emissions such as the reduction in automobile use and the substitution of coal fired power plants with alternative, clean fuels. The issue of climate change is also being linked to the use of energy in urban centres.4

Lastly, as demand continues to increase for energy in Canada, the development of new large scale centralized generation and transmission networks has slowed as efficiencies in terms of power generation from smaller systems has improved and the level of public support for large scale systems dependent on fossil fuel has decreased. Since the early 1980s, the costs associated with the development of smaller‐scale technologies, such as cogeneration of heat and electricity, especially when heat demands are concentrated, have gone down in constant dollar terms (see side bar).

Energy Decision Making Hierarchy

Careful land use planning requires that both building energy and transportation energy use be minimized so as to achieve an overall energy demand goal. This is one of the key principles of improving energy performance and reducing overall 3 Mark Jaccard, Lee Failing and Trent Berry. 1997. “From Equipment to Infrastructure: Community Energy Management and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction.” Energy Policy. Vol. 25 No. 13 pp. 1065‐1074. 4 Ibid.

December 19, 2008


energy demand. This process, while it might seem intuitive requires careful consideration of how to properly integrate various land use policies and non‐regulatory measures to achieve optimum energy and sustainable design.

Most energy related decisions and impacts within a municipality start from specific policies and land use decisions. As identified in Figure 1‐1, energy decision making occurs through an interconnected and hierarchical approach. Land use and infrastructure decisions tend to have longer term impacts that occur over decades. Decisions at the land use level also influence the various decisions at the building and site level, which in turn impacts the types of energy‐using equipment selected for a building on a yearly basis.

FIGURE 1‐1 ENERGY DECISION MAKING APPROACH5

Source: Jaccard et. al. 1997.

Urban land uses, especially urban form, influences all aspects of energy use as a result of density and land‐use patterns impacting the type of energy service requirement, such as commuting distances, transportation systems, energy supply systems and alternative energy systems. This means that land use decisions made today have a direct impact on a building owners options for energy using equipment for years to come.

A good example is district energy. Most district energy systems that are serving a variety of community users tend to be more efficient in the distribution and management of energy, as well as economically feasible where there is a relatively constant demand for their service, such as in a high density, mixed land use area. Decisions made at the regional or municipal development plan level in terms of density and mix of uses can have a direct impact on the viability of district energy in terms of ensuring a minimum heat load.

Land use decisions directly influence density and, subsequently the heat load, as well as cost effectiveness of a system. At the same time, planning decisions at the

5 The concept of the energy decision making hiearch and modified diagram framework is sourced to Jaccard et. al. 1997.

Infrastructure and Land Use (density, mixed use, energy supply infrastructure, transportation network)

Building and Site Design (industrial processes, transportation modes etc.)

Energy Use Equipment (boilers, vehicles, industrial equipment)

December 19, 2008


district or neighbourhood level related to the location and zoning of a district energy plant can influence the viability of a system. For instance, ensuring easements are maintained for infrastructure of a district energy system, such as piping, can reduce capital costs. Decisions related to rights‐of‐ways and servicing access can be protected during the planning process for a new subdivision. Finally, buildings need to be compatible for a district energy system and require that the appropriate building and design controls are put in place from day one of an initiative. A building’s heat supply system has a direct influence on the energy performance and on the mechanical, as well as architecture design of the building, which can alter the equipment selections for a building.

Subsequently, decisions in terms of energy efficiency of a building and alternative energy sources does start with the long‐term land use policy choices made by a community and are within realm of a municipal governments’ influence.

Density , Land Use and Energy6

Common objectives of higher density, mixed use development are the cornerstones for creating liveable communities, but also offer energy‐related co‐benefits. For instance, increasing density through building depth, height or by increasing compactness can affect the energy used within a building. More compact land use can permit the sharing of infrastructure, such as street lighting and water supply, which can reduce the per capita energy use associated with construction and operation and can also benefit from economies of scale in comparison to a more dispersed urban configuration. Figure 1‐2 provides an overview of the relationship between various land use decisions, the associated structural aspects of urban form and related energy outcomes.

FIGURE 1‐2 INTEGRATING LAND USE AND ENERGY

Source: Owens. 1992.

6 The concept of integrated energy planning is sourced to Susan Owens. 1992. “Land‐Use Planning for Energy Efficiency.”Applied Energy. Vol. 43 pp. 81‐114. Concepts used for this section were also derived from Katherine Sparkes. 2008. Energy Integrated Land Use Planning: Lessons from Toronto’s West Don Lands. Master’s Report. School of Urban and Regional Planning, Queen’s University.

Site & Building

Street & Block

District/ Neighbourhood

Municipality/ Region

Structural Variable• Design• Orientation• Form• Siting• Layout• Density• Diversity• Clustering (e.g. employment, commercial etc)

• Size

Energy Outcomes

Low intrinsic energy demand in built environment

Support residential demands for energy (Solar PV, DE etc)

December 19, 2008


A common mutual benefit of increasing land use intensity is the amount of energy required per hectare of land for space heating and cooling. When a building envelope is less exposed relative to a buildings volume, less energy is usually required for the heating and cooling of a structure. This generally applies to larger scale high rise residential and commercial office buildings that are in close proximity.

For housing, spacing heating can be most affected by design. In a dispersed development, such as a green field area, where greater solar access exists, passive solar design (using the suns natural energy to heat) can be captured and used to reduce space heating demands and the overall energy demand of a house. In compact urban environments, extensions and additions of floors to a housing unit can increase heating and lighting loads. For instance, obstructing a passive solar house can increase heating demands by as much as 22 percent.7 In an urban environment, the solar potential for housing can be quickly reduced as a result of obstructions and constraints on orientation.

For high rise buildings, residential or commercial, the opportunity to apply a mix‐mode servicing, such as avoiding air conditioning, using mechanical air supply and increasing daylight, are complementary in terms of building form implications. Increasing the height or the depth of a building is dependent on the types of heating, cooling and ventilation systems used. Generally, in an urban environment, the opportunity to increase height over depth can provide an opportunity for passive heating and natural light penetration, but can also contribute to overall energy consumed in a building.

While density and increased land intensity can improve efficiencies in energy consumption, especially with regards to energy consumption for transportation, careful consideration is also required about how density can limit the potential application of alternative energy sources. A good example is photovoltaics. In compact urban environments, the opportunity to use photovoltaics and solar hot water collectors will be reduced as a result of buildings not being designed to benefit from maximum solar orientation and shadowing due to natural and human‐made obstructions. Also, integrating larger solar hot water plants in an urban environment becomes increasingly challenging because of fixed land requirements and access to rights of way for transmission versus integrating a system into a new residential subdivision where each house can serve as a collector for the system.

1.2 INTEGRATED ENERGY PLANNING

Energy focused urban development policies can contribute to not only reducing intrinsic energy demands of land use and built form, but also improve the efficiency with which these needs are met. This can lead to reductions in resource use and reduced emissions into the environment. The appropriate measures involve the use of planning at the neighbourhood level in terms of land use design, as well as building layout and orientation, the use of alternative energy sources for local

7 Ibid.

December 19, 2008


power generation and building design codes. The important requirement is that they all need to work simultaneously to achieve reductions in energy use and GHG emissions.

Although the approach taken to achieve a “sustainable” urban energy system is debatable, the common denominator for cities that have adopted successful energy reduction measures is the inherent requirement to vastly improve energy efficiency in the built environment first compared with conventional practices. This is considered the key to reducing energy‐related impacts to the environment and eliminating the wastage of energy sources, but is also critical for encouraging the widespread use of alternative energy sources that may have higher costs per unit of energy delivered compared with conventional sources. While the cost per unit of energy may be higher, total costs for energy are reduced because of lower energy demand.

Achieving these energy efficiency gains requires a strategic approach one that switches from a supply oriented policy to a demand side approach designed around integrated energy planning as outlined in this report and supports the principles of an integrated urban energy system (IUES).8 In an integrated system approach to land use, energy, transport, water and water management places emphasizes on achieving the efficiency for systems as a whole, and encouraging the development of resources that are efficient, adaptable, resilient and sustainable. This can include:

• Encouraging compact mixed use developments of energy efficient residential, commercial and industry buildings that support efficient, accessible and affordable energy water, waste and transportation infrastructure;

• Developing district energy and the use of cascading energy between industrial, commercial and residential developments;

• Using smaller scale urban energy systems that are dispersed across a region, integrated and are closer to and within buildings;

• Increasing the contribution of local energy sources: solar; geothermal; biomass; wind; hydro and supplemented by larger scale electricity and gas grids as necessary.

8 Canadian Gas Association. 2008. Integrated Energy Systems in Canadian Communities: A Consensus for Urgent Action.

December 19, 2008


Mainstreaming Solutions for Climate Change and Energy Reduction

In 2008, the City of Toronto passed its climate change plan entitled, Climate Change, Clean Air and Sustainable Energy Action Plan: Moving from Framework to Action. It is among the first plans in Canada to connect the importance of energy reduction in the built environment with GHG emissions at a city‐wide level. The plan introduces a number of Toronto‐wide objectives, including: doubling the existing capacity of district energy systems, requiring precinct plans to have energy plans, and implementing the Toronto Green Building Development Standard (a comprehensive document providing targets, principles and practices to achieve sustainable development in buildings and urban design) through the use of recently enacted planning powers, including zoning with conditions.

2 THE IMPACT OF ENERGY ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT – WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

Planning for energy can contribute to the sustainability of a community by reducing energy costs and lowering environmental impacts. Over the last 5 years, urban energy demand has risen nearly 20 percent in Canada.9 It is expected that a growing population and increased urbanization will only continue to place pressure on existing energy and transportation infrastructure for municipalities. Energy consumption is by definition local and urbanization is an important factor for economic development and growth, which in turn sets the conditions of higher per capita energy consumption. Energy use, supply and demand both depend on and can help shape the design and development of a community and the activities of citizens, businesses, institutions, government agencies and industry. There are a variety of reasons for this, including a response to climate change, energy security, maintaining community competitiveness, and transitioning to new energy sources.

Response to Climate Change

There is now broad consensus among scientists and politicians that to avoid the full effects of climate change, including floods, droughts, extreme heat, rising sea levels and other problems, GHG emissions need to be reduced (see Appendix A for Impact of Climate Change in Canada). On average, buildings emit 35 percent of GHGs into the atmosphere, generate 10 percent of airborne particulate matter, utilize 33 percent of Canada’s total energy production, consume 50 percent of Canada’s natural resources, use 12 percent of non‐industrial water consumption, and produce 25 percent of Canada’s landfill waste.10 According to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), Canada’s residential building sector is also responsible for approximately 80 megatons of CO2 emissions annually, and the commercial building sector for approximately 69 megatons of CO2.

11 The connection between energy consumption and GHGs has largely focused on transportation, one of the fastest growing areas for GHG emissions in Canada, and many planning initiatives are directed at reducing the need for single occupant trips and encourage mass transit. At the same time, energy use in the built environment accounts for over 30 percent of all energy used in Canada. The awareness and growing concern in Canada about climate change is helping to shift the building and planning professions to explore the role for energy reduction and alternative use in the built form of a community development.

9 Canadian Gas Association. 2008. Quality of Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow. Integrated Energy Systems in Canadian Communities: A Consensus for Urgent Action. 10 Canadian Urban Institute. 2005. Mapping the Sustainability Supply Chain for Sustainable Building Practices in Canada. 11Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). 2008. Green Building in North America: Opportunities and Challenges. Available Online: http://www.cec.org/files/PDF//GB_Report_EN.pdf. For Canadian highlights see: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008‐03/cfec‐pgb031108.php

December 19, 2008


Germany 2020 Energy Plan – Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Germany has committed to switching to 100 percent renewable energy. In a landmark report, the Germany Energy Agency noted that the period lasting until 2020 would be the “make‐or‐break” years for achieving an affordable transition to renewable energy. In moving towards a renewable clean grid, the German Energy Agency has identified that the best potential to save energy is offered through the retrofit of existing buildings. Over 75 percent of the building stock in Germany is older than 1978 and about 50 percent of all buildings are expected to be refurbished over the next 20 years. The challenge identified was that improvements in energy efficiency are expected to be too low. The Germany Energy Agency has now embarked on Europe’s largest retrofit program requiring homes to have an energy consumption label and a requirement to replace boilers and other measures to improve efficiency. A major component of the retrofit program is ensuring that the goal of having 15 percent all energy required for new buildings and 10 percent for refurbished buildings supplied from renewable energy sources is met. Source: German Energy Agency. http://www.dena.de/en/

Energy Security

The demand for energy across Canada is continuing to grow. Canada’s energy consumption has risen by nearly 10 percent between 1990 and 2007. This is related to the widespread use of electronic equipment for businesses and residential applications, and the growth of energy intensive industries such as the oil and gas sectors. It is also well understood that meeting Canada’s energy needs will require a different broad based approach that accommodates expectations for reductions in energy supply as various forms of new fossil fuel sources begin to diminish over the next 100 years including coal, natural gas and oil. The total Canadian demand for electricity is projected to grow to 593 terawatt‐hours (TWh) by 2020.12 A dependable supply of energy is seen as critical for the financially secure operation of Canadian cities and is leading to an increased focus on reducing energy demand in the built environment through improved performance standards for buildings and through incorporating local alternative, as well as renewable sources of energy. The use of local energy production also provides the added energy security benefit for municipalities to reduce reliance on remote sources of energy or energy delivered through a grid distribution system.

Community Competitiveness

Energy, in all of its forms, is a fundamental building block for any activity from food to manufacturing in a community. It is also among the greatest expenditures for a community. For nearly every dollar that is invested into energy consumption, whether directly or indirectly, is a dollar that cannot be used to enhance and improve a community to make it more competitive.13 As world demand continues to increase and supplies of energy become more difficult to access and more expensive to produce, there is general agreement that the price of energy will rise. Affordable energy is essential to a prosperous economy and to the local economic health and well‐being of communities. It is expected that jurisdictions around the world without a large supply of indigenous energy will be more vulnerable to volatile energy markets. Countries, world organizations, and Canadian provinces and municipalities are beginning to assess various energy risks beyond just the generation or delivery of energy for the planning and development of communities.

Transitioning To New Energy Sources

Planning has an important, direct role in helping to allow communities to transition from a fossil fuel based economy to a low intrinsic energy world particularly in terms of building and land use. Power density is a measure that captures the rate of energy produced per unit of earth area and is usually expressed in watts per square

12 Brent Gilmour & John Warren. 2007. The New District Energy: Building Blocks for Sustainable Building. Canadian District Energy Association. Available online: http://cdea.ca/resources/highlights‐guidelines‐and‐manuals. 13 Ken Church. 2006. Factor‐2 Community Planning Guide. Natural Resources Canada. Available online: http://www.smartgrowth.ca/cep_e.html

December 19, 2008


metre (W/m2). Fossil fuel deposits are by far the highest concentration of high quality energy in the magnitude of 102 or 203 W/m2. Hence only a small land area is needed to supply vast amounts of energy. Today’s power producing techniques ensure that we receive fuels and electricity with power densities that are in the order of one to three magnitudes higher than regular power densities required to operate our buildings and cities. A future solar based society or one powered by other alternative sources would be at best only able to meet the small power densities used in residential development. This means that in order to supply residential development such as a single detached house with electricity would require an entire roof to be covered, while a supermarket would need a field ten times larger than its own roof.14 Both solar energy and wind energy have very low energy densities, which results in both energy sources having a relatively small quantity of energy available from each square meter of the earth’s surface area.

Canada’s built environment is designed around access to energy provided by fossil fuels. Switching to alternative and renewable fuel sources will require creating a built environment that does not have a high level of energy intensity and can be supported by lower power densities available through renewable technologies, such as photovoltaics, solar hot water and wind. This will involve a requirement to have new buildings to be designed to high levels of energy efficiency and existing buildings retrofitted to lower energy consumption. There is now increasing appreciation amongst planners and building designers for the importance of reducing the energy density in the built environment through improvements in efficiency and the reduction in the need for power.

14 Vaclav Smil. 2006. 21st “Century Energy: Some Sobering Thoughts”. OECD Observer Vol. 258/59 pp 22‐23

December 19, 2008


Private Sector Energy Planning In The McKenzie Subdivision In an established suburb of Calgary, Carma Developers, in conjunction with Avalon Master Builders, ATCO Gas and Ener‐West Geo‐Energy Services have begun construction on a master planned neighborhood. Avalon Master Builders is promoting its vision to build 100 percent of their homes as Net‐Zero at no additional cost to the consumer by 2015. Avalon has planned to construct 40 homes between 1400 and 1600 square feet and 4 homes between 2200 and 3000 square feet, which will be both heated and cooled using a geothermal loop and a gas powered geothermal heat pump. Solar hot water heating will provide for a portion of domestic hot water needs in the home, with the balance being provided by natural gas. The geothermal loop will result in an annual utility savings of between $500 and $1500 annually and the use of a gas powered rather than an electrical heat pump will cut operating costs by an additional 40 percent. On top of the geothermal and solar hot water systems, Avalon is constructing these homes with energy efficient walls and insulation (including the foundation), as well as windows, dual flush toilets and low flow showers and faucets. Source:www.mckenzietowne‐community.com and http://www.avalonmasterbuilder.com/

3 CALGARY’S GHG GOAL – A MEASURE FOR SUCCESS

Calgary has established an ambitious, but necessary proposed target of reducing GHG emissions at the community level to 50 percent below 2005 by 2050.15 This would bring Calgary’s total GHG emissions, including transportation, down from approximately 17,180kt/year to 8,590kt/year.16

Since 1990, as the population has grown, Calgary’s GHG emissions have also increased. Between 1990 and 2008, Calgary’s population has increased by over 300,000 people and has achieved an average annual growth rate of nearly 2.8 percent.17 Calgary has the difficult task of having to reduce its overall energy and GHG emissions for the built environment over the next 28 years as the economy continues to grow. An increase in population of 685,000 between 2008 and 2036 is forecasted, which will result in many new residential, as well as facilities to accommodate new jobs (see Figure 3‐1). A major source of GHG emissions for Calgary is the reliance on grid electricity, which is mainly produced from coal fired plants.

TABLE 3‐1 CALGARY TRENDS IN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 1990‐2003

Emissions Source 1990 (kt) 2003 (kt) Percent Change

Buildings

Electricity 5,435 7,153 31.6%

Natural Gas 2,884 3,846 33.4%

Building Sub Total 8,319 10,999 32.2%

Other

Vehicles 3,849 4,941 28.4%

Waste Disposal 307 443 44.3%

Urban Forest ‐13 ‐13 0%

Total 12,462 16,370 31.4%

Source: Modified Table. 2003 Calgary Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory.

To account for the fact that this report covers a period that is slightly less than that used to calculate the goal for reductions in emissions, the estimates have been pro‐rated to a 31 percent reduction in GHG emissions for the built environment.

15 The proposed community greenhouse gas emissions reduction target was established in the Calgary Climate Change Action Plan Target minus 50 report. The proposed community target is not an officially adopted policy objective of the City of Calgary. Two targets were established, 20 percent below the 2005 level by 2020 and 50 percent below the 2005 level by 2050. The report is avaliable on‐line at www.calgary.ca 16 City of Calgary. 2003. 2003 Calgary Community Greehouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Avaliable on‐line: www.calgary.ca. Note all GHG emissions for the City of Calgary include all emissions for buildings, transportation and the urban forest. 17 City of Calgary, Calgary & Region Socio‐Economic Outlook: 2008‐2013

December 19, 2008


Goteborg, Sweden Over the late 20 years, Goteborg, Sweden has used waste heat, organic municipal waste and geothermal as energy sources to operate a comprehensive district energy systems to provide domestic hot water and space heating to 90 percent of the apartment buildings and over 9,000 single family homes in the City. Recently, Goteborg expanded its district energy system to include a CHP system to supply 30 percent of the City’s power needs. A core goal of the Goteborg strategic energy plan is engaging local citizens to activity contribute to reducing energy consumption. The City holds regular training sessions with planners and designers to ensure new development are in line with the energy goals of the City. Currently, Goteborg is investing in a wind farm 75 km south of the City and is expanding its options of higher order transit to encourage further reduction in NOx emissions from traffic by 55 percent by 2010. Source: www3.goteborg.se Picture Source: www.destination360.com

The building GHG emissions for Calgary in 2005 were approximately 11,543kt/year. In order to achieve a proportional GHG emissions goal for buildings by 2036, a reduction in GHG emissions to 7,567kt/year would be required. To meet the ultimate 2050 community proposed target of a 50 percent reduction, which is approximately 5,772kt/year for buildings, a further reduction of 1,795kt/year in GHG emissions would be required to achieve the 2050 target.

The process for reducing GHGs emissions established in this report suggests that beyond 2036, Calgary can continue to move towards its 2050 objective.18 At the same time, successfully meeting Calgary’s overall proposed community GHG reduction target will also require significant reductions in GHG emissions from automobile transportation. Calgary’s 2005 transportation emissions were approximately 5,185kt/year. An equivalent reduction, as proposed for buildings, would require transportation GHG emissions to be reduced to 3,401kt/year in 2036 and to 2,592kt/year in 2050. If transportation emissions cannot be reduced to these levels, further increases in GHG reductions for buildings will be required for Calgary to meet the 2036 and 2050 goals. A comprehensive review of transportation emissions similar in scope to the review prepared for the built environment would allow Calgary to identify the specific measures that need to be implemented to ensure that the 2036 and 2050 transportation emission objective would be achieved.

FIGURE 3‐1 FORECASTED POPULATION GROWTH AND GHG EMISSIONS BUSINESS AS USUAL

Source: CUI Model.

By simultaneously reducing GHG emissions associated with transportation and including all the energy efficiency and alternative energy objectives set out in this report, Calgary can expect to accommodate the forecasted growth in population and jobs, while meeting the overall GHG proposed community reduction target of 50 percent below 2005 for 2050.

To provide a constructive framework for the study and to develop a benchmark for decisions related to the energy analysis, scenarios and mapping exercise, the target 18 Potential GHG reduction measures identified exceed the need to achieve the 2036 goal and selection of technologies for implementation in the next 28 years was based on considerations of those technologies with the shortest payback period.

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

GHG Emmission

s (Co2

e)

Popu

lation

Year

Forecasted Population Growth and GHG Emissions Business as Usual

Population

GHG

December 19, 2008


of achieving a 50 percent reduction in GHG emissions within the built environment with support from alternative energy sources by 2050 was adopted by the research team.

All subsequent decisions related to the level of improvement in energy efficiency required for the built environment and the selection and location of alternative energy sources were based on achieving the target of 7,567kt/year in 2036 for buildings in Calgary.

December 19, 2008


Annual Energy Use in Alberta Residential, Commercial and Institutional Buildings

Source: Natural Resources Canada, Comprehensive Energy Use Database, 2006

4 LOCAL ENERGY PROFILE Alberta has a diverse and deep resource portfolio that includes coal, electricity, minerals, natural gas, conventional oil, petrochemicals, renewable energy sources and access to North America’s largest reserve of oil – the Alberta oil sands. The majority of Calgary’s energy supply for electricity, space and water heating and cooling is generated outside of the immediate city boundaries.

4.1 PROVINCIAL ENERGY SUPPLY OVERVIEW

Across the province, there is approximately 12,090 MW of supply and nearly 10,000 MW of peak demand for electricity. Additional electricity supply is provided from British Columbia with a total capacity of 1,000 MW and through an interconnection with Saskatchewan which delivers 150 MW.19

Thermal sources account for majority of Alberta’s installed electricity generation. Coal fired plants represent 48.7 percent of production, while natural gas serves nearly 38 percent.20 Over half of the natural gas production for electricity is achieved using cogeneration.21 The remainder of electricity generation is obtained through hydro, wind and biomass.22

In addition to heating homes in North America, 75 percent of natural gas consumed in Alberta is used by the industrial sector, including electricity production. Alberta provides over 80 percent of all natural gas produced in Canada and distributes nearly 77 percent outside of Alberta to the United States and other provinces.23

Over the next 10 years, it is expected that Alberta will require approximately 3,800 MW of new electricity capacity to meet expected demands for commercial, residential and industrial processing uses.24

19 Ontario Power Authority. 2005. Supply Mix Advice: Current Electricity System. Available On‐Line: http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/ 20 Alberta Energy. 2003. Alberta’s Energy Industry: An Overview 2007. Available on‐line: http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/Electricity/539.asp#FactSheets 21 Cogeneration works to recover thermal energy that would be wasted in an electricity generator, and save the fuel that would have been used to produce thermal energy in a separate system. Cogeneration is usually achieved by generating electrical power and exhaust heat from the process for heating water or producing steam to drive a turbine and generate electricity. 22 Biomass is any organic matter than can be burned. 23 Alberta Energy. Alberta’s Energy Industry: An Overview 2007. Available on‐line: http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/Electricity/539.asp#FactSheets. 24 Enmax. 2007. Enmax Announces 1200 MW Power Station. Avaliable on‐line: http://www.enmax.com

Space Heating58%

Water Heating9%

Other33%

Commercial and Institutional

Space Heating67%

Water Heating19%

Other14%

Residential

December 19, 2008


4.2 MUNICIPAL LOCAL PRODUCTION

Calgary draws extensively on the use of electricity from the grid and natural gas. Only a small fraction, 2.7 percent, of Calgary’s current generation capacity is produced within the city boundaries by several major public and private systems (See Table 4‐1).

TABLE 4‐1 EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES OF ENERGY GENERATION IN CALGARY

Municipal Initiative Type of System Energy GJ (2006‐7) Proposed

System GJ Green Electricity Purchases

Grid Electricity 945,000

Bonnybrook Waste Treatment Plant

Methane power generation Electricity 39,600

East Calgary Landfill Biogas Dry/Bioreactor Landfill Cell Electricity 665 Shepard Landfill Biogas Electricity 362 North East Calgary District energy

District energy fuelled with natural gas.

Natural Gas 684

Private Sector Initiatives

Type of System GJ (2006‐7) Proposed

System GJ ECCO Wood Chip Manufacturing

High condensing boiler fuelled with biomass.

Electricity 1,941

Southern Alberta Institute of Technologies

CHP fuelled with natural gas. Electricity and Natural Gas

862,600

University of Calgary District Energy

District energy systems fuelled with natural gas.

Natural Gas 784,900

University of Calgary CHP Expansion

Simple cycle combined heat and power.

Electricity and Natural Gas

1,600,000

ENMAX Downtown Calgary District Energy

District energy fuelled with natural gas.

Natural Gas

360,000

ENMAX Downtown Calgary District Energy

CHP fuelled with natural gas. Electricity 700,000**

ENMAX Shepard Energy Centre

Combined cycle turbine fuelled with natural gas.

Electricity 15,137,280**

Total Capacity 2,773,529 17,437,281 Source: City of Calgary, Infrastructure Services and correspondence with owners of private facilities. **System estimates for GJ were based on estimated system efficiency and availability.

Currently, the city uses approximately 33,642,270 GJ/yr of electricity and 67,090,313 GJ/yr of natural gas for space and water heating, cooling, humidity control and for powering all buildings as well as some industrial processes as outlined in Table 4‐2.25 This represents close to 30 percent of the total natural gas and electricity produced in Alberta for commercial, office and residential buildings.

25 For the purposes of this study, energy consumed in terms of electricity and natural gas at the point of connection to industrial buildings within the city boundaries includes energy used within those buildigns for industrial processing.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 4‐2 EXISTING ENERGY DEMAND FOR BUILDINGS IN CALGARY 2008

Fuel Energy Use GJ/yr

GHG Emissions Tonnes CO2e/yr

Energy Supply Cost CAD/yr

Primary

Electricity 96,120,771 8,282,255 954,023,432

Natural Gas 95,843,304 4,787,373 588,988,086

Total 191,964,076 13,069,628 1,553,021,519

Actual Energy Delivered**

Electricity 33,642,270 8,282,255 954,023,432

Natural Gas 67,090,313 4,787,373 588,988,086

Total 100,732,582 13,069,628 1,553,021,519 Source: CUI Model. **The difference between primary and actual energy delivered is the various losses in energy including combustion, efficiency losses and transmission.

Figure 4‐1 provides a breakdown of the annual energy cost by end use in Alberta for residential, institutional and commercial buildings and is representative of the energy costs by end use within the built environment for Calgary.

FIGURE 4‐1 ANNUAL ENERGY COST IN ALBERTA RESIDENTIAL, INSTITUTIONAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS BY END‐USE26

Source: Natural Resources Canada, Comprehensive Energy Use Database, 2006.

26 Natural Resources Canada classification of energy use for various commercial and institutional buildings includes those buildings that fall within industrial classifications for the City of Calgary, such as wholesale trade, retail trade, and transportation and warehousing.

0100200300400500600700800

Space Heating

Water Heating

Auxiliary Equipment

Auxiliary Motors

Lighting Space Cooling

Street Lighting

$ Million

Commercial/Institutional Buildings

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Space Heating

Water Heating

Other Lighting Space Cooling

$ Million

Residential Buildings

December 19, 2008


Space and water heating represent the largest areas of growth in energy use and are a significant portion of the energy cost for all building owners in Alberta. Space heating provides one of the best opportunities for energy cost savings and can be achieved through improvements in building design and costs lowered through the application of local alternative energy sources.

The average cost per capita in Calgary for the supply of gas and electricity to all buildings is $1,648 per year. This includes the cost of gas and electricity delivered to all types of buildings in Calgary. It is expected that the cost of energy for heating and powering buildings, even for Alberta, will continue to rise as world market prices for energy increase over time. Table 4.3 shows estimated demand and cost changes for building energy in Calgary for 2036.

TABLE 4‐3 FORECASTED ENERGY DEMAND FOR BUILDINGS IN CALGARY 2036 BUSINESS AS USUAL

Fuel Energy Use GJ/yr

GHG Emissions Tonnes CO2e/yr

Energy Supply Cost CAD/yr

Primary

Electricity 153,887,609 13,294,242 1,527,031,621

Natural Gas 130,700,874 6,528,509 816,849,694

Total 284,588,483 19,822,751 2,343,881,314

Actual Energy Delivered**

Electricity 53,860,663 13,294,242 1,527,031,621

Natural Gas 91,490,612 6,528,509 816,849,694

Total 145,351,275 19,822,751 2,343,881,314 Source: CUI Model. **The difference between primary and actual energy delivered is the various losses in energy including combustion, efficiency losses and transmission.

Going forward, homeowners and consumers will want lower energy costs and more affordable options for supply. At the same time, industrial, retail and commercial operators will also be looking for improved reliability and stable energy costs that insulate them from the volatility of the energy market place. Investors will want to see predictable returns on investment in energy facilities that are less vulnerable to disruption and ensure a stable return. Addressing these demands involves going beyond providing new central supply options and examining how existing energy demand within Calgary can be reduced and new energy demand kept to a minimum within the built environment.

December 19, 2008


Energy Reductions across Canada from Energy Efficiency Initiatives

Source: Office of Energy Efficiency: The State of Energy Efficiency in Canada. 2006. Available at: http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/Publications/statistics/see06/pdf/see06.pdf

5 ACHIEVING CALGARY’S GHG GOAL THROUGH THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

In Alberta, energy used in homes and offices represents a large portion of the total energy consumption. For Calgary, approximately 70 percent of energy is related to residential applications, 9 percent for commercial buildings, 5 percent for retail, 6.5 percent for institutional and civic and 9.5 percent for industrial.

Over the last 25 years, governments at all levels, together with natural gas and electric utilities, have developed a number of market interventions in an effort to reduce the overall demand for energy by residential, industrial, or commercial energy users. The energy efficiency of most equipment and buildings in Canada has steadily improved, but energy demand has continued to increase for all sectors. This is a result of increased economic activity, primarily from the growth of the housing and commercial building stock, larger floor area per person for homes, and the increasing use of energy using devices, have nearly offset the vast majority of energy efficiency improvements to‐date. Subsequently, the energy demand curve continues to show an upward growth, especially in major cities across Canada. The key challenge is understanding how Calgary can begin to affect this trend as the city continues to grow and, consequently, bend the cure of the slope down.

The following section outlines the first step for evaluating the opportunities in terms of the built form for reducing energy demand and GHGs, as well as for providing the base case to assess the types of alternative energy sources applicable to Calgary and where they might be located.

5.1 BENEFITS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Increasing the efficiency within buildings can provide energy, financial, human health and infrastructure benefits, such as reduced energy use, less strain on energy distribution networks, reduced operating costs, increased cash flow for building owners and improved local air quality.

The production and consumption of energy can result in local and regional negative impacts on the environment through criteria air containments (CACs). CACs are a major source of air issues and are related to the production of smog and acid rain. Smog is attributed to a wide range of environmental impacts on vegetation, structures, visibility and human health. In Alberta, the heating of buildings and industrial and electrical generation can be attributed to 7 percent of all particulate matter, 98 percent of all sulphur dioxides (S02), 73 percent of nitrous oxide emissions (N0x), 60 percent of all volatile organic compounds, and 31 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Reducing energy demand and encouraging the

December 19, 2008


Support for Energy Code Changes in Canada

There is mounting support for improvements in energy codes across Canada. In a national poll released in March 2006, nearly 92 percent of Canadians surveyed agreed that Canadian governments should be incorporating mandatory standards of efficiency in new building to deliver a minimum of 50 percent in energy efficiency over the next 10 years.

The survey revealed that government leadership is a necessary prerequisite in advancing market transformation for sustainable activities by Canadians, including energy efficiency improvements in buildings.

Source: James Hoggin and Associates Inc. 2006. Nine in 10 Canadians feat our lifestyle is not sustainable: Most blame lack of government leadership. Available from: www.hoggan.com

generation of power from local energy sources can contribute to reducing the levels of CACs in Calgary and across Alberta.27

Another direct benefit of reducing the energy intensity of a building through improved efficiency is the reduction in the amount of heat and electricity required for a building. This can increase the ability of alternative energy sources to meet almost all of the energy demand of a building and displace the reliance on coal fired electricity power plants and direct burning of gas for heating buildings and domestic hot water use.

5.2 SELECTING A BUILDING EFFICIENCY MODEL

A wide variety of voluntary standards and rating systems exist for buildings and energy using equipment. These codes and standards have contributed to reducing the overall demand for energy across Canada and accelerated advancements in all aspects of design, construction and operation of buildings.

The standard selected by the team to undertake an analysis of energy efficiency improvement for the entire Calgary built environment was the Model National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (MNECB). The reference code developed for homes, the Model National Energy Code of Canada for Homes (MNECH), was not used for buildings under three stories. Alternatively, all mandatory provisions that are to be met for MNECH where incorporated into the model.28

Introduced in 1997 by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), the MNECB has become Canada’s design standard of energy efficiency in commercial and multi‐unit residential building standards.29 Maximum thermal transmittance levels as well as identifying new standards for heating recovery and referenced new energy efficient equipment standards are outlined within the code.30 The code also address issues related to energy for the retrofit of older buildings.

Relative to traditional building codes, including Alberta’s, the MNECB is unique in that it addresses environmental protection and resource conservation instead of focusing on the structural integrity of buildings. This is achieved through the development of minimum standards of building components and systems that can directly impact energy performance in a building including the envelope, HVAC systems, lighting, water use and water heating.

27 Cheminfo Services Inc. 2007. Forecast of Criteria Air Contaminants in Alberta (2002 to 2020). Available on‐line: http://www.casahome.org 28 Both the Model National Energy Code for Houses and the Model National Energy Code for Buildings are divided into the same five technical sections: building envelope; lighting; heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems; service water heating systems; and, electric power. The primary difference between the codes is that the MNECB is more detailed than the MNECH in areas of lighting, mechanical systems and electric power consumption, but less detailed for the air tightness of the building. For the purposes of this study the requirements for airtightness were raised to be the same requirement in the model for MNECH and other low‐rise residential specific building components. 29 National Resources Canada, Office of Energy Efficiency. 1999. Introduction to the Model National Energy Code for Buildings. 30 Ibid.

December 19, 2008


Benefits of Energy Codes and Standards • Updating energy standards is a

cost‐effective policy option for governments; each dollar spent on increased efficiency pays back many times to the consumer and the economy.

• Roughly one‐third of all energy is consumed by building, so this is an important sector to address.

• Technologies are available to construct new buildings that use 30 ‐70 percent less energy, with improved comfort.

• Market forces often break down in the area of building efficiency, so minimum standards are necessary to ensure energy is not being wasted.

• Most codes and standards are now designed with extensive industry involvement, using a censuses approach. This has reduced the reluctance for codes to be quickly adopted.

• Energy codes and standards for commercial buildings make businesses more competitive domestically and overseas by reducing utility expenses.

• Energy codes and standards help reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emission.

Source: U.S. Department of Energy, through the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s Building Technologies Program.

With the support of Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC), a national initiative is now under way to update the MNECB. A cross‐country engagement process has led to the creation of a special committee, the Building Energy Code collaborative, to help advance the adoption of an updated MNECB. The Province of Alberta is currently in the early stages of an impact study to assess the application of MNECB plus 25 percent for commercial and high‐rise residential development.

As a result of the codes not being updated since 1997 the team selected two alternative higher levels of energy efficiency improvements including: 25 percent better than MNECB and 50 percent better than MNECB. The amendments were required to reflect new building techniques, new design and construction practices, energy prices and construction costs and a focus on reducing GHGs. Similar levels of efficiency where also selected for the retrofit of buildings at the level of 10 percent and 25 percent reduction in energy use compared with current efficiencies. A higher level of efficiency was not selected for building retrofits based on the challenges associated with integrating modern design and technology standards into existing buildings and the higher unit costs for improving energy efficiency in existing buildings compared with new buildings.

5.3 ENERGY IMPROVEMENT SCENARIOS

The overall objective of building energy efficiency standards is to achieve high levels of energy reduction and can be achieved by following the prescriptive path outlined in the MNECB. The code provides requirements for increasing energy efficiency of the building envelop; lighting; heating, ventilating and air‐conditionings systems; domestic hot water systems; and electrical power.

While the approach and technologies can vary, the overall performance of an energy efficiency program, such as the prescriptive path of MNECB, can be predicted and is widely understood and applied by building designers.31 To determine the potential energy and GHG reduction benefits of applying the code, this study evaluated three different scenarios involving various degrees of energy improvement standards for the development of new buildings and retrofits.

Scenario I

The starting point was to assume that no changes would occur to any of the existing and new development in terms of energy efficiency improvements. This provides the Business As Usual scenario and a baseline for all energy consumption for the existing built environment in Calgary.

Scenario II

The next level considered a more modest proposal in energy efficiency, referred to as high efficiency, with existing buildings being retrofitted to reduce energy

31 The MNECB gives the building designer immense flexibility in terms of how to comply with the miniumun requirmenets as setout in the code. This offers a wide latititude in terms of the type of direction that a desigener might take.

December 19, 2008


Netherlands Energy Performance Standard With just 16 million people spread across an area the size of Nova Scotia, the Netherlands rapidly advanced the application of alternative energy generation. Increasing sustainable energy is the primary responsibility of the Netherlands Agency for Innovation, Energy and Environment (NOVEM). Through NOVEM municipalities across the Netherlands have developed energy plans with a focus on energy efficiency. Each municipality has engaged in assessing the energy performance of all existing buildings and established targets for improvement using the Energy Performance Standard (EPN) and Energy Performance Location (EPL). The EPN, similar to the MNECB, sets minimum standards for energy performance, while the EPL provides direction on the types of energy improvements, based on cost, that should proceed in different parts of a City. All new homes constructed in the Netherlands must submit a Energy Performance Coefficient as part of the building process. The result, homes across the Netherlands are achieving high standards of energy efficiency.

Source: http://www.senternovem.nl/english/

consumption by 10 percent and all new buildings achieving an energy efficiency level of 25 percent above the MNECB (i.e. MNECB + 25 percent).

Scenario III

This final scenario, referred to as Ultra High Efficiency, assumes that most state‐of‐the‐art building technologies are being applied to new buildings. All existing buildings would be retrofitted to 25 percent and all new buildings would need to achieve MNECB plus 50 percent (i.e. MNECB + 50 percent).

Scenario Combinations

All three scenarios where tested through combinations to assess the highest level of energy efficiency in terms of reduced energy demand, GHG reductions and total energy cost savings.

Modeling Assumptions

Electricity and natural gas represent the largest fuel sources for Calgary’s residential and commercial buildings. Other forms of fuel, such as oil, wood and alternative energy sources represent a relatively insignificant amount of the total energy consumed. For the purposes of building improvements, it was assumed that this situation would prevail throughout the study period, which is to 2036. For Scenario II, Scenario IIII and Scenario Combinations, the modeling focused on the quantities of electricity and natural gas that could be displaced by using energy efficient design standards. After assessing the amount of displaced energy, estimates in terms of reductions in GHG equivalents to improved energy efficiency were prepared, as well as overall cost reductions for energy use and, where applicable, capital costs for building energy efficiency retrofits and incremental capital costs for incorporating improved energy efficiency in new buildings.

The approach taken to capture the existing building inventory for Calgary and to project future development involved a comprehensive analysis and drew on several sets of data. To establish the base line of energy consumption within the existing building stock for the city, the Calgary assessment roll was used to record all private sector buildings, while institutional and government agencies were directly contacted for building information.32 Forecasts for future population and land use area projections were provided by the City of Calgary. To improve the energy modeling accuracy, building types were limited to seven types and were based on the MNECB definitions of buildings. Table 5‐2 provides an overview of the building typology used for this study. Appendix B provides a detailed breakdown of the methodology developed to baseline the energy performance for the built form.

The following summarizes the evaluation of the scenario options.

32 Two major sets of public building data were not avaliable for existing uses, including municipal buildings and the Catholic School Board. Public buidings are generally not part of a municipal assessment role. Estimates of total square footage were developed for the City of Calgary and the Catholic School Board.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 5‐1 CALGARY ENERGY MAP BUILDING STUDY TYPOLOGY

Building Typology Definition

Residential Low Rise Single family detached units including accessory units.

Residential Medium High Rise Units up to three stories (duplex, townhouse, row house etc).

Residential High Rise Units above four storeys.

Commercial Office Quality office developments at all sizes and all classes.

Commercial Retail All forms of retail (grocery, big box etc.)

Industrial All forms of industry.

Institutional All other buildings types (Calgary municipal services, hospitals, schools and colleges and university).

Scenario Evaluation To 2036

Table 5‐3 provides an overview of the combinations in terms of energy reduction and GHG emissions that can be achieved for various scenario building improvement combinations. For instance, if no improvements were made to existing buildings and all new buildings were built to achieve a 25 percent improvement in energy efficiency, GHG emissions would increase from 13,069kt/year to 18,487kt/year and energy costs could increase from approximately $1,553 million/year to potentially $2,183 million/year.33

TABLE 5‐2 SCENARIO REDUCTIONS OVERVIEW FOR 2036

Building Scenarios Energy Cost Total

$ CAD/yr

GHG Total

Tonnes C02e/yr

Energy Use Total GJ/yr

Payback Period Years

Existing Building

Existing With No Retrofit 1,553,021,519 13,069,628 100,732,582 n/aExisting‐10% 1,396,174,430 11,758,504 90,607,826 12.3Existing‐25% 1,161,161,129 9,792,511 75,429,270 11.6

New Buildings

New Using Current Practice 790,859,796 6,753,123 44,618,693 n/aMNECB + 25% 630,794,178 5,418,272 32,449,980 1.8MNECB + 50% 481,350,702 4,150,302 23,488,762 2.7

Combination of Scenarios

Existing + New 2,343,881,314 19,822,751 145,351,275 n/aExisting + MNECB +25% 2,183,815,697 18,487,899 133,182,562 1.8Existing + MNECB +50% 2,034,372,220 17,219,930 124,221,344 2.7Existing‐10% + New At Code 2,187,034,226 18,511,627 135,226,519 12.3Existing‐10% + MNECB +25% 2,026,968,608 17,176,776 123,057,806 7.0Existing‐10% + MNECB +50% 1,877,525,132 15,908,806 114,096,588 5.9Existing‐25% + New At Code 1,952,020,925 16,545,635 120,047,962 11.6Existing‐25% + MNECB +25% 1,791,955,307 15,210,783 107,879,249 8.8

Ultra‐High Efficiency

Existing‐25% + MNECB +50% 1,642,511,831 13,942,813 98,918,031 7.7

Source: CUI Model.

As outlined in Figure 5‐1, to achieve a high level of energy reduction will require a substantial investment in terms of initial capital cost. It is estimated that if all

33 Precise numbers are shown in all tables throughout report and are based on the predicted model for energy use and emissions that was developed by the CUI (i.e. CUI Model). In reviewing this data, emphasises should be placed on reviewing the ratios between values for different assumptions.

December 19, 2008


1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Energy Cost

(millions of d

ollars)

Capital Investm

ent C

ost

(miilions of d

ollars)

Capital Investment vs. Energy Savings

Capital Cost

Energy Cost

Toronto Atmospheric Green Loan Established in 1991, TAF is Canada’s only municipal climate change agency working to mitigate global warming and to improving air quality. To help meet the challenge of reducing the cost premium for creating environmentally‐friendly buildings, TAF launched Green Loan, Canada’s first green building loan, to encourage energy efficient and environmentally‐friendly condominium development in the City of Toronto. The Green Loan enables a developer to produce a high performance condominium that is competitive with a conventional one. The loan achieves this by enabling the condominium corporation to become the primary agent accountable for repaying the loan. Shifting the loan payment responsibility away from a developer and towards the condominium owners ensures that the financial benefits of an energy efficient building will be realized and reduces the financial risk for a developer. The positive results from the financial program have led TAF to encourage support for sustainable building from the financing sector.

Source: http://www.toronto.ca/taf

buildings were retrofitted to reduce energy consumption by 25 percent and all new buildings built to apply the MNECB plus 50 percent, a total capital investment of approximately $5.4 billion would be required to achieve the improvements, but an annual energy saving over $700 million per year could enable all investments to be captured in less than 8 years based on a simple payback calculation. By incorporating improvements to the built environment for both existing and new buildings, the average annual energy cost per energy consumer for all buildings in Calgary (residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial) could be lowered by as much as 38 percent to approximately $1016 per person based on current energy costs. The potential saving in energy costs of $700 million, not only compensates for expenditures associated with the capital improvements, but also provides significant revenue that can be directed back into the local community.

FIGURE 5‐1 CAPITAL INVESTMENT VS. ENERGY SAVINGS

Source: CUI Model.

The most aggressive of all the scenario combinations is applying the Ultra‐High Efficiency combination. This would contribute to an electricity reduction of nearly 27 percent, while natural gas consumption would decrease by 35 percent. Emission reductions are also very impressive with a total decrease of 30 percent from gas and electricity GHG emissions, which is about 5,900kt of GHG/year. The overall reduction in emissions and energy while favourable in moving towards Calgary’s GHG goal does not reflect that after taking into account the extensive energy efficiency improvements to the built environment, GHG emissions will continue to rise by about 6.7 percent compared with 2008 as outlined in Table 5‐3. This is due to energy demand continuing to rise with new economic and population growth in Calgary. A full discussion on the cost implications of undertaking the retrofits and improvements for new buildings for the Ultra High Efficiency scenario is provided in Appendix E.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 5‐3 GHG INCREASES FOR CALGARY BUILT ENVIRONMENT

GHG Produced [Tonnes C02e/yr]

Buildings New Buildings Existing Buildings Retrofits – 25%

Reduction

Total Percent Increase From Existing

Building Emissions 2005

13,069 kt/year Conventional Construction

6,753,123 9,792,511 16,545,634 26.6

MNECB + 25% 5,418,272 9,792,511 15,210,783 16.4 MNECB + 50% 4,150,302 9,792,511 13,942,813 6.7

Source: CUI Model.

By selecting the Ultra High Efficiency scenario, Calgary can reduce its GHG emission increases for buildings to 6.7 percent to 13,943kt/year as outlined in Figure 5‐2. This is in spite of an estimated increase in building floor area by 36 percent. The goal of reducing GHG emissions to 7,567kt/year by 2036 requires a further reduction of 6,376kt/year of GHG emissions.

This means that even after extensive energy improvements to the entire built environment for Calgary, a further 46 percent reduction in emissions is required.

To move towards achieving the additional reduction in emissions will involve the displacement of conventional gas and electrical energy supplies with alternative energy sources and is discussed in section six.34

FIGURE 5‐2 FORECASTED POPULATION GROWTH AND GHG EMISSIONS MAX EFFICIENCY

Source: CUI Model.

34 The payback period for applying alternative energy technologies is expected to be longer than the combined payback period for building energy efficiency retrofits and improved building efficiencies.

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

GHG Emmission

s (Co2

e)

Popu

lation

Year

Forecasted Population Growth and GHG Emissions

Population

GHG Business as Usual

GHG Max. Efficiency

December 19, 2008


5.4 APPLYING BUILDING ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS

An energy efficient building can take many forms. The type of efficiency achieved is largely dependent on the design approach and type of technologies incorporated into a building compared to the MNECB benchmark. Residential building efficiencies have steadily improved over the last few decades. In Alberta, the Built Green™ program has contributed to raising awareness within the development industry about the use of sustainable building practices for low‐rise residential development. For high rise residential and institutional buildings, federal initiatives such as the Commercial Building Improvement Program and the introduction of whole building rating systems, including the Leadership in Energy and Environment Efficiency (LEED®) Canada rating system administered by the Canada Green Building Council have encouraged developers and building owners to incorporate higher standards of energy efficiency. The City of Calgary has led the way across Canada in terms of encouraging improvements in the built environment for municipal buildings by being among first cities in Canada to have adopted LEED® Canada certification for new buildings and through the adoption of a Sustainable Building Policy that includes incentives for developers.

Moving forward with improvements in energy efficiency to the built environment can be simple and involve low cost modifications to a building. A detailed overview of the various strategies that can be used to improve the energy efficiency of all building types prepared for this report is provided in Appendix C. Using the MNECB a new building that is:

Exam

ple A‐ R

esiden

tial . 25%‐50% MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT requires a minimal change from

current design and construction standards. Improvements in low rise residential construction can be achieved by instituting a combination of improved efficiency in mechanical heating equipment such as the boiler, more insulation in the walls and roof and reducing lighting requirements. For high rise residential buildings, more attention to window performance and floor to wall ratio can improve efficiencies. An example is the Vento residence building in Calgary.

Exam

ple B‐

Commercial

. 25‐50% MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT requires modest incremental improvements. For commercial office buildings, more attention to insulation and air sealing in exterior walls, and the replacement of T12 with T8 fluorescent lighting in the ceiling can improve efficiencies. Moving to a 50 percent level will require the use of an integrated design approach where the design team considers different HVAC systems such as chilled beams or radiant heating. An example is the Jamieson building in Calgary.

Exam

ple C‐

Institutiona

l

. 25‐50% MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT requires adhering to the MNECB code, but drawing on innovation. These buildings can use natural day lighting more effectively, incorporate motion sensors to turn lights on and off and use high‐efficiency HVAC equipment. Moving to the 50 percent level of efficiency will require a larger focus on improvements to the ventilation systems and consider the opportunity for heat recovery systems. An example is the Mount Royal College Roderick Mah Centre for Continuous Learning.

December 19, 2008


The retrofitting of buildings across Calgary will be an important outcome for reducing the overall demand for energy and will enable the city to accommodate both population and economic growth, while still moving toward the proposed community target of 50 percent reduction in GHG emissions. Table 5‐4 provides an overview of the basic retrofit initiatives that can be undertaken by building owners to reduce energy consumption. Each building in Calgary will be different in terms of its existing energy performance, types of equipment, age and design. To better assess the potential return on investment from improvements will likely require building owners and operators to undertake an energy performance audit.

TABLE 5‐4 POTENTIAL BUILDING RETROFIT ACTIONS

Scenarios Building Type Type of Improvement Potential Action Scenario II 10% Reduction

Residential Low Rise Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures.

Fluorescent, Compact fluorescent fixtures.

Medium High Rise Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures. Improve lighting controls.

Fluorescent, Metal Halide fixtures. Occupancy, daylight, photosensor controls.

Residential High Rise

Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures. Improve lighting controls.


Commercial Office Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures.

Fluorescent, Metal Halide fixtures.

Commercial Retail Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures.

Fluorescent, Metal Halide fixtures.

Institutional Upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures. Improve lighting controls.


Industrial Improve lighting controls. Improve HVAC efficiency.

Occupancy, daylight, photosensor controls. High efficiency heating systems, setback thermostats.

Scenario III 25% Reduction

Residential Low Rise Improve the efficiency of furnace and DEW heaters. Improve the air tightness of the building.

Instantaneous domestic hot water heater. Blower door testing of existing homes.

Medium High Rise Install VFDs on pumps and fans. Improve the efficiency of central plant and DEW equipment.

VFD control of main heating supply pumps. Install condensing boiler.


Install VFDs on pumps and fans. Improve the efficiency of central plant and DEW equipment.

VFD control of main heating supply pumps. Install condensing boiler.

Commercial Office Improve the efficiency of central plant equipment.

Install condensing boilers.

Commercial Retail Further upgrade to more efficient lighting fixtures. Further improve lighting controls.


Institutional Install improved HVAC controls. Install of building automation system. Industrial Institute process energy efficiency

measures Recover waste heat from a manufacturing process.

Source: CUI Model.

Building Rating and Improvement Programs

The City of Calgary is already designing and constructing new buildings that are more energy efficient. There are over 21 municipal buildings being designed to LEED® certification and the City has adopted the Business Owners and management Association (BOMA) Go Green program (now known as BOMA BESt) as a Corporate rating system for 800 buildings to achieve a triple‐bottom line improvement. The City of Calgary is clearly demonstrating leadership and is achieving not only

December 19, 2008


corporate‐wide‐buy in, but is also stimulating the market place to adopt better standards for energy performance. In the Calgary area, there are 81 home builders who are members of BuiltGreen™ Canada and nearly 5080 homes enrolled in the program. There are also a number of commercial buildings awaiting LEED® certification, as well as over 80 buildings that have now achieved BOMA BESt certification in Calgary.

TABLE 5‐5 WHOLE BUILDING AND HOUSING ENERGY RATING EQUIVALENTS

New Construction Retrofit of Existing Buildings Scenarios Building Type Program Equivalent Scenarios Building Type Program Equivalent Scenario II MNECB + 25%

Residential Low Rise EnerGuide 75, Builtgreen Silver

Scenario II 10 % Reduction

Residential Low Rise EnerGuide 55

Residential Medium High Rise

EnerGuide 75, Builtgreen Silver

Residential Medium High Rise EnerGuide 55

Residential High Rise LEED Prerequisite Residential High Rise ENERGY STAR 65 Commercial Office LEED Prerequisite Commercial Office ENERGY STAR 65 Commercial Retail LEED Prerequisite Commercial Retail ENERGY STAR 65 Institutional LEED Prerequisite Institutional ENERGY STAR 65 Industrial LEED Prerequisite Industrial ENERGY STAR 65

Scenario III MNECB + 50%

Residential Low Rise EnerGuide 85, Builtgreen Gold

Scenario III 25% Reduction

Residential Low Rise EnerGuide 70

Medium High Rise EnerGuide 85, Builtgreen Gold

Medium High Rise EnerGuide 70


LEED ‐ 6 EAc1 Points

Residential High Rise ENERGY STAR 75, LEED‐EBOM Prerequisite

Commercial Office


Commercial Office ENERGY STAR 75, LEED‐EBOM Prerequisite

Commercial Retail


Commercial Retail ENERGY STAR 75, LEED‐EBOM Prerequisite

Institutional


Institutional ENERGY STAR 75, LEED‐EBOM Prerequisite

Industrial


Industrial ENERGY STAR 75, LEED‐EBOM Prerequisite

Source: CUI Model.

Moving to increase the performance of buildings in terms of energy efficiency can best be achieved by drawing on successful programs that are already well recognized by the citizens of Calgary, but also by the development industry (see Table 5‐5). For instance, the City of Calgary building permit process is used as a mechanism for encouraging residential builders to adopt the BuiltGreen™ program. Using well established industry market and federal rating systems can contribute to rapid commercialization and provide the added benefit of offering the City of Calgary with access to well established measures to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of building improvements.

December 19, 2008


Harnessing District Energy, Solar Energy and Geothermal in Alberta The Town of Okotoks is the first municipality in North America to have established growth targets in a master plan based on the local environmental carrying capacity of the watershed to treat and dispose of effluent. With assistance from several federal organizations and ATCO, the Town of Okotoks set out to demonstrate the potential for solar energy to meet space heating and hot water requirements for a new subdivision community, the Drake Solar Landing Community. The 52‐home solar community is located with a larger 835 home subdivision and demonstrates the opportunity for district energy systems to work efficiently with low energy consuming residential homes. By developing all of the homes connected to the district energy network using Canada’s highest standard for energy efficient homes (R‐2000), nearly 90 percent of all space heating needs for the homes are now met by solar energy. Picture Source: http://media.canada.com

6 THE NEED FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES

Applying advanced improvements in energy efficiency for the development of buildings can slow the overall energy demand for Calgary and is the first step to ensuring the city meets the proposed community GHG targets. At the same time, a strategy based on the maximization of energy efficiency does carry a high level of risk. It can be assumed that, for a variety of reasons, not all energy consumers will adopt energy efficiency technologies and practices for a variety of reasons. Continuing to move towards the proposed community target of 50 percent GHG reduction will also require, at the very minimum in 2036, the ability of alternative energy sources to provide about 73 million GJ of energy, while lowering GHG emissions by a further 46 percent or 6,376kt/year of GHG emissions.

The following section reviews the various best alternative energy sources considered for use and application in Calgary and sets out a process for the selection and location of the technologies in the city.

6.1 ENERGY SOURCES REVIEWED FOR CALGARY

There are many different alternative energy technologies available for urban environments. However, each requires a thorough understanding of the limitations in terms of integration within existing built environments and for new surrounding areas. For the purposes of this study, alternative energy sources identified for testing and application where limited to current market technologies and fuels that have a proven track record in terms of cost‐effectiveness, technically proven either in Canada or in Europe, are commercially mature, are socially and environmentally acceptable and have the ability to reduce GHG emissions by increasing energy efficiency and/or displacing fossil fuels. The following energy sources were reviewed for displacing natural gas: GeoExchange, also referred to as earth energy systems or geothermal heat pump systems; solar air; solar hot water; energy sharing; sewer heat capture and, district energy. The remaining energy sources were assessed for their contribution to electricity displacement: photovoltaic; biomass; wind, and district energy with combined heat and power (CHP).

GeoExchange (Earth Energy)35

Using the earth as an energy source is a well established process for the heating and cooling of buildings. Throughout the year, particularly in the summer months, solar energy is absorbed by the Earth’s surface. The ground retains the thermal energy, resulting in relatively constant ground temperatures over an entire annual season. In order to extract or add heat, a heat pump is used. In the winter, a heat

35 The terms earth energy and geothermal energy tend to be used interchangeably. Earth energy systems rely on the stable temperatures of the Earth’s surface while a geothermal system derives energy directly from the core of the earth. Geothermal systems are widely used in Iceland, New Zealand, Japan, China, Mexico and certain parts of the United States. There are few places in Canada that lend well to the application of geothermal systems.

December 19, 2008


Boston Solar Initiative In June 2007, the City of Boston joined the inaugural Solar America Cities initiative launched by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The half million Solar Boston program is designed to encourage the widespread adoption of solar energy in the City. As part of the initiative, a strategy was prepared to encourage the installation of solar technology throughout Boston, including mapping the ideal locations for Solar installations. The strategy includes the planning and bulk purchase of systems, financing and installation of the systems through the organization of a non‐profit organization. The goal of the initiative involves increasing the amount of solar energy in the City from one‐half megawatt today to twenty‐five megawatts by 2015. As part of the initiative, a solar on‐line map has been developed that allows you to see active renewable installations within the City and calculate the solar potential of a given roof‐top. Source & Picture Source: http://www.cityofboston.gov/climate/solar.asp

pump works to extract heat from the ground, while in the summer the pump can be used to provide air conditioning by moving hot air out of the building and down into the soil.36 As an added benefit, the systems can be configured to supplement domestic hot water needs. A heat pump can also be used to circulate hot water produced from solar hot water collectors and heat energy transferred into the ground during the summer to be used during peak heating times in the winter. The process is applied to help provide the base load of thermal heating during the winter for the Drake Landing residences in Okotoks.

Earth energy is exceptionally efficient in terms of tapping into a “free” energy source. This is because less energy is required to move heat than convert one kind of energy into another. Earth energy has the potential to significantly reduce the amount of natural gas used by buildings in Canada. The reduction, however, does not appear to result in a substantial decrease in atmospheric emissions. Although earth energy systems are applicable to the Calgary environment, the requirement to use electricity to pump fluids results in the potential for an increase in GHG emissions, although at levels lower than generated by natural gas.

TABLE 6‐1 GEOEXCHANGE GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Source: CUI Model. **Denotes an increase in GHG emissions. Increase would change to reduction if Alberta’s electricity generation system became less dependent on burning fossil fuel.

Solar Air

Solar heating involves using the sun’s energy to reduce the energy required to heat a building. The most established form of solar space heating is in the form of passive solar heating, which involves optimizing the thermal absorption potential of buildings through the use of windows, orientation, darks surfaces and heat retaining materials. The second option is through the use of active solar heating and involves using the mechanical energy to improve the solar energy transfer. A widely recognized application for solar air heating is the use of solar walls. Solar walls are similar to building cladding that create an air gap between the façade and cladding. Air within the gap is warmed from solar radiation and can be used to preheat a buildings intake air. A solar wall can pre‐heat air by as much as 17‐30oC, which

36 A heat pump is capable of boosting the latent thermal energy found in low temperatures sources up to temperatures suitable for space conditioning and water or process heating. A heat pump operates by transferring heat from a low temperature source to a higher source through the use of a condensing fluid. The fluid is generally in a gas state and is circulated through a system by a compressor. The hot and highly pressured gas is cooled in a heat exchanger. The hot gasses are then condensed, returning to a liquid state where the heat is transferred to a secondary fluid e.g. treated water that is then circulated for heating.

Evaluation Factors GeoExchange

Capital Cost $/GJ $10 Operating Cost $/Gj/yr $15 Energy Displaced GJ 59,811,850

Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr (1,414,123)** GHG Decrease kg/GJ (23.64)**

December 19, 2008


Schaffrath Solar Settlement, Gelsenkirchen, Germany The Schaffrath community is a residential area constructed in the 1960s and was retrofitted in phases between 2001 and 2004 to be more efficient. The area is served by district energy, and was well suited to the retrofit of a solar district energy system as a result of roof slopes facing south and where generally at an incline greater than 30 degrees. For a total investment of €3, 863, 000, the solar power plant produces 764 000 kWh of energy annually. A total of 29 photo‐voltaic systems are located on 63 building rooftops and cover an area totaling 6,670m2. The 422 housing units in Schaffrath are fed by the solar system located on the roofs and the system is expected to pay for itself in approximately twenty years. Annual income from the plant is €357,266 which results in a total profit of €75, 337 per year. Source: http://www.gelsenkirchen.de Picture Source: http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/06/worldcup_stadiums/image/gelsenkirchen.jpg : Shows the Gelsenkirchen Science Park.

drastically cuts down on the amount of delivered heat required from a primary energy source. The application of solar walls are limited and require buildings to have fresh air ventilation loads. Overall, solar walls provide a high level of natural gas displacement, but are limited in the potential application across the city.

TABLE 6‐2 SOLAR AIR GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors Solar Air


Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr 220,706 GHG Decrease kg/GJ 26.35

Source: CUI Model.

Solar Hot Water

Large‐scale solar heating for individual, multi‐building developments or entire settlements are well established in Europe, but the market remains limited in Canada with smaller domestic systems and site‐specific applications, such as for swimming pools, taking precedence. Although water heating is the second‐largest energy end use in most residences, solar water heating is only now beginning to have a larger uptake by energy consumers as technological challenges associated with freeze‐protection and overheating are being addressed, and the associated cost of energy continues to rise for fossil fuels. A wide range of solar heating technologies have been developed from flat‐plate solar collectors to more advanced evacuated tube assemblies.37 The basic principle is that a solar collector, generally mounted on the roof‐top, is used to transfer the heat of the sun to a fluid flowing in the area of the collectors absorbing surface. Most solar water systems tend to be connected “up‐stream” of conventional systems such as a mechanical heating system or electricity from the grid to address the potential for prolonged system interruption from cloudy periods or extreme winter peak heating requirements. Calgary has the added advantage of being located in one of the highest receiving areas for solar radiation in North America, with over 1,757 titled surface solar days per year and 1,380 days horizontal surface days per year.38 The heat produced can be used on an individual building, in a centralized residential

37 Liquid flat plate collectors are the cheapest design of solar‐hot water collectors. The plate is mounted directly to a roof or within a simple frame with flow tubes set in the absorption materials that allow fluid to be heated and circulated. An unglazed system is usually used for low temperature applications, such as heating a swimming pool, while a glazed liquid flat plate collector can achieve moderate temperature for use in domestic hot water. 38 A common practice to increase the performance of a solar collector in the winter is to tilt it so the surface is at an optimum angle to the horizontal.This allows the collector to receive maximum solar raditation when the sun is lower in the sky than if the plate where sitting on a horizontal plane. In Calgary, the tilted solar collector is likely to produce a more even level of radiation absorption to meet heating needs during the winter months.

December 19, 2008


Gasifying Municipal Waste – In Red Deer Alberta The City of Ottawa was the first municipality in Canada to permit the construction of a 100 tonne per day commercial gasification demonstration facility by Plasco Energy Group. Similar to systems in Europe, the waste conversion process begins by extracting all materials with high value (i.e. recycling and reuse potential) and eliminating hazardous waste. Waste is converted into a crude synthetic natural gas (syngas) and converted into a higher form of gas (removal of containments) called PlascoSyngas. The PlascoSyngas is further refined to remove all major air containments and used to fuel a combustion engine that produces steam to turn a turbine and for district energy. The City of Red Deer will be the first recipient of a commercial facility capable of producing 15MW of electricity. More Information & Picture Source: http://www.plascoenergygroup.com/ Picture depicts schematic model of Ottawa plant.

area or used to augment a district‐heating network. Expected reductions in natural gas consumption and emissions are substantial for solar hot water heating.39

TABLE 6‐3 SOLAR HOT WATER GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors Solar Hot Water

Capital Cost $/GJ $150 Operating Cost $/Gj/yr $0* Energy Displaced GJ 41,868,295

Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr 2,987,602 GHG Decrease kg/GJ 71.35

Source: CUI Model. *The operation cost excludes maintenance costs. Generally, solar hot water, which is a gravity systems has no operation cost.

Energy Sharing

Energy sharing is a form of waste heat recovery from industrial process that can meet the base building heating requirements of surrounding facilities. Excellent sources of waste heat include major pulp and paper industry, cement industry, chemical plants, petroleum refineries, glass working industry, ore smelters and steel mills. While this specific form of energy sharing will be highly site dependant, the system will generally include a method of reclaiming waste heat and transferring it to surrounding facilities. Surrounding facilities will typically incorporate a heat pump to upgrade waste heat to useable qualities or space heating at each site.

TABLE 6‐4 ENERGY SHARING GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors Energy Sharing


Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr 63,059 GHG Decrease kg/GJ 26.35

Source: CUI Model.

Sewer Heat Capture

Sewer heat recovery involves the capture of heat from municipal or industrial liquid waste. The process involves tapping into local, renewable sources of energy. Most sewer flows have a natural heat presence of 10‐30oC. The “waste” heat present in sewer water is a resource that can be used as a primary energy source. To capture the thermal energy, a heat exchanger is required. Heat exchangers can be installed directly into an actual sewer or are located externally to a sewer where the flow is

39 The requirement to provide for storage of heat during the most sunny days or back‐up from an electrical grid adds an additional complication and cost to undertaking larger scale solar district energy. This is largely due to the intermittent nature of solar energy, which means that solar hot water collectors are only able to generate peak levels of thermal heat for a very short period of time during any one year. This results in a lower capacity factor or utilization factor (annual energy generated to the amount which would be generated if the system were to generate at peak output 24 hours per day for a complete year). A typical fossil fuel plant has a capacity factor of around 80 percent, while a solar system might have 10 percent or less.

December 19, 2008


Solar Financing – Saarbrucken, Germany Since the 1970s, the City of Saarbrucken has worked to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through innovative financing and information sharing opportunities. The local utility, Saarbruken Energy Company, has focused on encouraging solar and wind energy. Among the financial incentives used includes providing funds for private power suppliers of solar energy, introducing linear tariffs for the use of solar hot water and photovoltaic energy, co‐financing wind energy and providing free advice and training for passive solar design and development of buildings. The City encourages the development and ownership of privately owned solar power plants. To encourage the uptake of these systems, the City offers low‐interest loans. The program is encouraging the installation of over 260,000 m2 of solar production in the City, which would bring production to the amount 900 kWh of power. The City has also initiatived a pilot wind park project to power 2,500 homes and is expected to reduce GHG emissions by 6,500 tonnes. The City has also launched a training facility to educate developers and home builders about solar construction and energy saving technologies. Source: http://www.eaue.de Picture Source: City of Saarbrucken, http://www.climateactionprogramme.org

diverted (similar to a hydro‐electric dam). In a similar process to geothermal application, a heat pump is required to boost temperatures from the warm sewage supply to a higher temperature for use in space heating and domestic hot water. The heat can be easily distributed to a centralized residential area or a district‐energy network. The first distributed energy system of its kind in Canada is being built for the South East False Creek Development in the City of Vancouver, British Columbia. From an environmental impact, sewer heat recovery requires a high energy displacement for electricity as a result of sewer heat serving as the main source of primary energy. At the same time, the use of a heat pump requires electricity from the grid, which results in increases in GHG emissions.

TABLE 6‐5 SEWER HEAT CAPTURE GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors Sewer Heat Capture


Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr (56,565)** GHG Decrease kg/GJ (23.64)**

Source: CUI Model. Denotes an increase in GHG emissions. Increase would change to reduction if Alberta’s electricity generation system became less dependent on burning fossil fuel.

Photovoltaics(PV)

In addition to providing water and space heating, solar energy can also be converted into electricity using photovoltaic cells. Systems consist of semi‐conductor cells connected together and mounted into modules. Modules are connected to an inverter to convert their direct current (DC) output into alternating current (AC) electricity for use in buildings. Photovoltaics supply electricity to the building they are attached to or to any other load connected to the electricity grid. Excess electricity can be returned to the grid when the generated power exceeds the local need. PV systems require only daylight, not sunlight to generate electricity (although more electricity is produced with more sunlight), so energy can still be produced in overcast or cloudy conditions. Similar to solar hot water, PV is one of the more economical alternative energy sources considered in this assessment. The centralization of larger PV generating stations has generally been limited by space availability and access to the grid. The level of reductions for GHG emissions is among the highest for any of the technologies examined.40

40 The concentration of solar collectors (PV generating station) can contribute to generating electricity on a fairly large scale. A number of systems operate in the U.S. in hot and sunny climates, which enable the period of maximum electrical out‐put to closely match that of the period of maximum demand for air‐conditioning.

December 19, 2008


Integrated Manure Utilization System (IUMS), Vegerville Alberta A small pilot plant near Vegreville, Alberta, uses an anaerobic digestion system to produce biogas from manure. The biogas used to generate electricity and heat. The pilot plant works on three 8 hour cycles: feeding the digesters, separating the solids from the liquids and nutrient recovery. Currently, the IMUS system produces just under 1MW of electricity. About 300 kW of this power is used to power the feed lot, which contains about 36,000 cattle and produces 36 million kg of manure annually and the remaining 700 kW is used to provide over 700 homes with electricity. Future development of the plant will boost the energy output to 3MW. More Information: www.climatechangecentral.com/resources/IMUS.pdf

TABLE 6‐6 PHOTOVOLTAIC GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Source: CUI Model. *The operation cost excludes maintenance costs.

Biomass

Biomass is normally considered a carbon neutral fuel, as the carbon dioxide emitted on burning has been relatively absorbed from the atmosphere by photosynthesis and no fossil fuel is involved. Biomass generation produces electricity that can be used to displace building loads but is typically exported to the grid. There are two types of technologies used with biomass sources, including combustion and gasification. Biomass combustion is a proven technology approach used across Canada with a variety of “waste fuels”, such as hog effluent, sawdust and bark, woodchips, agricultural waste, municipal waste, sewage, and processed and domestic waste. The major challenge for biomass combustion is meeting provincial or local requirements for air emission standards from stacks. Gasification is an emerging technology in Canada, with several major demonstration facilities in major Cities. Red Deer, Alberta will be the first commercial location for a gasification system built by PlascoEnergy.41 Biomass generation in Alberta has typically been constructed at locations where a constant source of biomass is generated. Fuel transportation costs have tended to limit the feasibility of centralized biogas generation facilities.42

TABLE 6‐7 BIOMASS GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors Biomass



Source: CUI Model.

41 Gasification of biomass is another way of converting residues into useable forms of energy. Gasification is a thermal‐chemcial conversion of biomass under limited oxidation and moderate temperatures that result in converting biomass into low to mid energy content biogas. The benefit of biogas is that the gases can be used in any form of end device such as a boiler to produce heat and gas turbines to produce power. 42 There are a number of sources of large scale feedstock in Alberta including forestry waste (especially with increasing amounts of timber killed by mountain pine beetle), agricultural residue such as wheat straw and manure, and purpose grown energy crops such as sugar beets. The challenge with most of these sources is the transforming of biomass into a readily accessible source, such as wood pellets or a suitable liquid fuels for transportation and direct use in various combustion engines.

Evaluation Factors Photovoltaics

Capital Cost $/GJ $650 Operating Cost $/Gj/yr $0* Energy Displaced GJ 5,474,865


December 19, 2008


Malmö, Sweden (Western Harbour)

Malmö is the commercial centre of southern Sweden and an international City with 270,000 residents. As part of the City’s efforts to undertake intensification and revitalization of the inner harbor, the City has developed the Western Harbour as a highly efficient community that is 100 percent fuelled by local renewable energy sufficient to support 20,000 employees and 10,000 people for housing. The entire energy systems is sized to accommodate for 90,000 m2 of living area or about 1000 apartment units. The energy system is fuelled by several sources, including wind power from a nearby generator, photovoltaics, solar hot water and the use of a geothermal with the support of a heat pump system. The entire heating and cooling of the development is met by an expansive district energy heating grid that delivers about 5 million kWh of thermal energy. Among the advancements in the design and development of the community is the use of energy efficient buildings and the upset energy consumption that can be consumed for any one property. The use of an average annual target of consumption, allowed the designers of the energy system to optimize performance. Each unit in the Western Harbour cannot exceed 105 kWh/m2 of gross room area. This measure includes all energy related to heating, hot water, as well as electricity for households. Source: http://www.malmo.se/sustainablecity Picture Source: static.flickr.com/67/160348075_bab54f23b1.jpg for Western Harbour, Malmö

Wind

Wind energy is one of the most cost effective methods of renewable power generation. Wind turbines can produce electricity without carbon dioxide emissions ranging from watts to megawatt outputs. The most common design is for three blades mounted on a horizontal axis, which is free to rotate into the wind on a tall tower. The blades drive a generator either directly or via a gearbox (generally for larger machines) to produce electricity. The electricity can either link to the grid, charge batteries, or directly offset concurrent loads in the building. An inverter is required to convert the electricity from direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC) for feeding into the grid. Southern Alberta (including Calgary) has better wind availability than most major cities in Canada. As a result, wind generation is one of the more economical renewable energy sources considered in this assessment and can contribute to significant reduction in GHGs when compared to coal‐fired electricity.

TABLE 6‐8 WIND TURBINE GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Source: CUI Model. *The operation cost excludes maintenance costs.

District Energy

District energy is a recognized approach for meeting the heating, cooling and domestic hot water needs of buildings and can support the process‐heating requirement of local industry. Most district energy systems work to manage the thermal needs of energy consumers at both the building and community level. In managing energy, district energy can accommodate a variety of different energy demands of a building, industry or an entire community. District energy systems can be designed with a central energy plant, such as the ENMAX system in downtown Calgary, or can have a number of multiple plants (a combination of several smaller systems) that are interconnected or phased in through new developments over time. All district energy systems are connected through a series of pipes that transport energy through steam, hot water or chilled water to buildings. A variety of fuels and technologies can be used in a district energy system that generates thermal heat and electricity. District energy systems that produce both thermal energy and electrical power use a process referred to as combined heat and power (CHP). CHP systems work to recover thermal energy that would otherwise be wasted in a electricity generator, and save the fuel that would have been used to produce thermal energy in a separate system. CHP is usually achieved by generating electrical power and having exhaust heat recovered from the process for heating water or producing heat to drive a turbine and generate electric power. Although traditional sources of fuel, such as natural gas, are most common as a primary

Evaluation Factors Wind

Capital Cost $/GJ $300 Operating Cost $/GJ/yr $0* Energy Displaced GJ 5,474,865


December 19, 2008


energy source, alternative and renewable fuels (solar power, geothermal energy, biogas biomass, and reject heat from industrial and municipal processes) can be used in all plants. District energy systems are also flexible in that the source of energy can be augmented with different types of fuel inputs such as solar hot water or biomass, if a low temperature systems is used. TABLE 6‐9 DISTRICT ENERGY GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors District Energy



Source: CUI Model.

TABLE 6‐10 DISTRICT ENERGY WITH CHP GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL

Evaluation Factors CHP


Total GHG Decrease Tonnes C02e/yr 4,293,300 GHG Decrease kg/GJ 110

Source: CUI Model.

6.2 ENERGY SOURCES APPLICABLE TO CALGARY

From the variety of cost effective and proven energy sources examined, each offers a number of new energy production opportunities for Calgary at a building site or neighbourhood level. Collectively, the net potential for reductions in GHGs and for the displacement of natural gas and coal‐fired electricity is impressive. Prior to engaging in the assessment for all of the alternative energy sources, two technologies, sewer heat capture and GeoExchange, were excluded from consideration due to their increasing contribution to GHG emissions.43

The approach used to identify the most applicable energy source that could meet the 6,376kt/yr GHG emission reduction goal was based on the measure of lowest cost per tonne of C02 reduced when considering operating cost plus debt repayment on capital cost as outlined in Table 6‐11. This measure was applied for two reasons. First, by undertaking a cost assessment for each of the energy sources, the economic viability of the energy source could be evaluated in terms of cost per dollar of carbon. Secondly, maximizing the GHG reduction, at a reasonable cost, was assumed to be the most prudent approach to meet Calgary’s objective. In general, technologies with lower combined costs per tonne of C02 reduced were favoured

43 Should the energy mix for Alberta change through the addition of other alternative or renewable fuel sources, such as wind, biomass or other sources to allow for the replacement or non‐reliance on centralized coal fired plants, these systems would be more viable in terms of their contribution to meeting Calgary’s GHG objective.

December 19, 2008


over technologies with higher costs. However, factors such as feedstock availability and future fuel and technology flexibility for Calgary were also taken into account.

TABLE 6‐11 COST PER TONNE OF C02 DIVERTED FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE BY 2036

Energy Source Displaced Technology CDN Cost/tonne C02e Displaced Based On 10% Annual Repayment on Capital Cost*

Gas Solar Hot Water $210 Gas Energy Sharing $569 Gas Solar Air $569 Gas District Energy $1018 Electricity Biomass Substitution for Fossil Fuels $148 Electricity Wind $119 Electricity CHP $258 Electricity Photovoltaic $257 Source: CUI Model * The 10 percent annual repayment assumed capital debt would be repaid over 20 years at an interest rate of 8 percent. For lower interest rates, the repayment period would be shorter and for higher rates it would be longer.

With space heating as one of the highest demands for energy and cost to building owners in Calgary, the study focused on displacing heating energy through the use of natural gas and second through electricity generation. Although the concept of using lowest cost technologies was followed, practical issues were also considered in the selection of various alternative energy sources. As outlined in Table 6‐12, after wind generation, biomass substitution for fossil fuels in electricity generation, such as coal, has the lowest unit cost for reduction in GHG emissions. Theoretically, nearly all the GHG emission reductions required after energy efficiency building improvements could have been achieved by substituting biomass for fossil fuels in the Alberta electrical generation system.

However, this level of substitution would require significant transformation of the grid system, in terms of displacing coal fired power. Furthermore, a detailed study on the long‐term availability of biomass and the impacts of such a change on the Alberta electrical grid has not been undertaken. Moving towards a grid system based on biomass could be the subject of a separate specialized report and may be appropriate as the recommendations of the report are put into place. For the purposes of this study, the level of displacement of electricity generation using biomass was degraded to a level that could support the development of a community scale 350MW plant that would be half the size of Toronto’s waterfront 550 MW Portlands Energy Centre system now in operation. This represents about 20 percent of Calgary’s electricity demand in 2036 and assumes that the energy efficiency improvements outlined and other alternative energy sources reviewed are implemented.

An excellent opportunity exists to incorporate biomass into electricity generating systems being developed within Calgary, such as the proposed Shepard Energy Centre. Currently, preliminary engineering and design work are underway to support a combine cycle turbine technology fuelled by natural gas. There might be some potential to incorporate biomass into the fuel mix, but a full detailed engineering feasibility study would be required to determine the practicality of this concept.

December 19, 2008


The starting point for the selection and ranking of alternative energy technologies involved maximizing solar hot water and energy sharing based on various restrictions, such as roof top coverage for active solar systems. This was then followed by district energy in terms of displacement of heating capacity using natural gas. For electricity, a district energy system with CHP capacity was applied at a level used by comparable systems elsewhere in Canada and was followed by the maximization of wind and biomass to displace coal fired electricity generation.44 Photovoltaics where not required to meet the electricity displacement requirements to achieve Calgary’s GHG goal. Although costs are slightly less for photovoltaics relative to district energy systems with CHP capacity, district energy systems have the added benefit of being able to incorporate other renewable and alternative fuel sources, such as solar hot water and biomass, and are more appropriate for the higher density communities proposed across Calgary due to the limited roof area in high density development for the distribution of photovoltaic panels.

Relative to other energy sources reviewed, the unit costs provided for a district energy system with CHP are high and the overall availability of electricity is very low. These costs and electricity availability are based on the performance of recently built‐systems in Canada and assume a relatively dispersed heating customer base. Additional detailed modeling for CHP systems might reveal that the unit costs can be reduced in Calgary and the electrical yield increased relative to the estimates in this report. These changes would improve the economics of implementation of a strategy to achieve Calgary’s GHG reduction goals, but are not likely to have an impact on the overall proposed approach to apply the selected alternative energy sources.

TABLE 6‐12 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES FOR CALGARY BY 2036

Energy Source Replaced

Alternative Energy Source

Energy Displaced As %

Energy Displaced GJ

Capital Cost $ CAN

Energy Supply CDN Cost Reduction/Yr

GHGs Reduced Tonnes C02e/yr

Gas

Solar Hot Water 70 41,868,295 $6,280,244,279 $373,809,984 2,987,602 Energy Sharing 4 2,392,474 $239,247,401 $9,398,200 63,059 Solar Air 14 8,373,659 $837,365,904 $32,893,702 220,706 District Energy 12 7,177,422 $1,322,532,944 $19,224,513 173,941

Electricity CHP 0.72 281,565 $6,867,427 $6,867,427 30,912

Wind 14 5,474,865 $1,642,459,607 $154,912,342 1,382,404 Biomass 20 7,821,236 $1,955,309,056 $182,197,164 1,583,800 Photovoltaics** n/a 5,474,865 $3,558,662,482 $154,912,342 1,382,404

Source: CUI Model. **Provided for reference only and is not required to meet GHG goal for Calgary.

44 The role of biomass for displacing coal fired electricity generation is significant for several reasons. First, biomass substitution can improve the GHG reductions achieved for energy sharing and solar air over time. Secondly alternative energy sources removed from the model, GeoExchange and sewer heat capacity, are likely to be more positive in terms of GHG reductions with biomass fuelled electricity generation.

December 19, 2008


The associated capital cost for undertaking the alternative energy sources and the Ultra High Efficiency building scenario is nearly $17.7 billion CDN. Although this is a substantial capital investment in infrastructure and energy efficiency improvements over a 28 year period, the combined simple payback period is approximately 12 years. Investing in energy efficiency improvements starting now will contribute to “future proofing” Calgary’s economic and energy infrastructure by not only increasing the level of existing local generation, but also allow Calgarians to benefit from the potential that energy prices may rise faster than the rate of inflation. Also, capital investments will also contribute to increases in local labour employment, which could also be beneficial to Calgary’s economy.

Overall, Calgary can displace almost 60 million GJ/year of natural gas through the combined use of solar hot water, energy sharing, solar air and district energy, which would equate to a reduction in 3,445kt/year of GHG emissions. With the added use of a district energy system with a CHP and wind generation and the substitution of biomass for fossil fuel electricity generation at source, the remaining 2,997kt/year of GHG reduction could be achieved and the Calgary GHG reduction objective of 5,772kt/year in GHG emissions for buildings obtained. A summary of the GHG reduction strategy is provided in Table 6‐13.

TABLE 6‐13 SUMMARY OF MEASURES REQUIRED TO MEET CALGARY’S 2036 GHG GOAL FOR BUILDINGS

Source: CUI Model.

Approach C02e Reduction tonnes/year

Net C02e tonnes/yr

CDN Capital Cost Energy Supply CDN Cost Reduction/ yr

Energy Supply CDN Cost/yr

Buildings Business as Usual

0 19,822,751 0 $0 $2,343,881,314

Ultra High Efficiency

5,879,938 13,942,813 $5,385,886,258 $701,369,483 $1,642,511,831

Alternative Energy Sources

5,990,813 7,567,000 $12,345,833,461 $918,196,871 $723,694,960

Alternative Energy Operating Cost

‐$138,893,538 $862,588,498

Totals 11,870,751 7,567,000 $17,731,719,719 $1,481,292,816 $862,588,498

December 19, 2008


7 LOCATING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES – CALGARY ENERGY MAP

The use of any of the energy sources examined is dependent on a number of factors from technological development to economic feasibility. Another important factor is assessing the viability of an energy source for use in a given urban environment relative to the specific type of pattern of energy demand for a given city. Energy demand can be characterized as energy use applications, which can consist of space and water heating and cooling, residential, commercial and municipal lighting, industrial process, and any other activity requiring the use of heat or electricity. The distribution and breakdown of the energy use applications varies across the city relative to land use and built form and directly impacts on where an alternative energy source can be applied.

This section outlines where an alternative energy source can be maximized for use in Calgary to meet future energy demands for the city.45

7.1 ENERGY MAPPING PROCESS

The information generated from the building energy scenario development assessment and alternative energy sources was incorporated to project the energy use patterns for Calgary to 2036. The process involved using the future projections of built form provided by the City of Calgary for residential, commercial and industrial development into the seven building types identified for this study (see Appendix B for the mapping process). The energy intensity factors prepared for the building energy efficiency scenarios were applied to the relevant Plan It Calgary land uses to create the Business as Usual and Ultra High Efficiency Maps.

To adequately assess the levels of energy demand that could support the alternative energy sources in a cost effective and GHG reduction manner, a primary measure of energy was selected to display land use energy impacts, GJ per hectare (GJ/ha). Density in terms of number of dwelling units per hectare or units per hectare, as well as jobs or people per hectare can all be used as a proxy measure to assess the various levels of thermal load density (thermal load is the amount of energy per land area) for a community.46 At the same time, density is limited in terms of capturing the potential for overall GHG reductions or the likely financial

45 To adequately evaluate the full capacity of each energy source to be integrated into the City of Calgary requires a detailed feasibility study for each technology to determine the local design opportunities and constraints. The assessment provided in this report is intended to offer policy direction and does substitute or replace the need for a detailed technical feasibility study for each alternative energy source discussed. 46 Density impacts energy demand. The higher the density for a community, the higher the energy demand for the built enviroment. Conversely, low density can suggest the potential for less energy demand within the built environment, but higher requirements for transporation. To fully assess the impact of land use, both transporation and land use energy impacts need to be considered together to evaluate options for the reduction in the consumption of GHG emissions.

December 19, 2008


viability for an alternative energy source and cannot display energy efficiency improvements in the built environment across a city.

The GJ/ha metric has gained increased support within the planning community to assess the appropriateness of land uses and built form from an energy consumption perspective.47 The GJ/ha measure represents the estimated amount of space heating and cooling, hot water and electricity that would be consumed annually per hectare at full build out by 2036.

For the alternative energy sources map, a high GJ/ha value (greater than 3,000) suggests that certain alternative energy sources will be more economically viable, such as district energy systems or a system with CHP capacity due to lower infrastructure costs per unit of building development and is a good indicator that further investigation of a district energy system should be considered. Alternatively, a lower GJ/ha (lower than 3,000) measure suggests that certain alternative energy sources that have a lower energy density capacity, such as solar thermal, solar air and photovoltaics, are more appropriate for meeting the heating and electricity demands for energy consumers.

7.2 CALGARY ENERGY MAPS

Three GJ/ha maps have been prepared to illustrate the energy use in Calgary. For all the maps, existing sources of energy generation within Calgary are displayed.

The first map, Figure 7‐1, presents the Business as Usual Scenario (BAU) to 2036 and illustrates all new development being built to existing energy efficiency standards set out in the Alberta building code. The BAU would result in a net increase in GJs of 45 million/yr and GHG emissions of 6,753 kt of GHG emissions.

The second map, Figure 7‐2, illustrates the Ultra High Efficiency proposed improvements in the built environment. Collectively, across Calgary, there is a 33 percent reduction in the average amount of GJ/ha for all land uses between the BAU and the Ultra High Efficiency Maps.

47 Another widely applied energy and GHG metric currently used to assist land use and transportation planning is vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT).

December 19, 2008


FIGURE 7‐1 BUSINESS AS USUAL MAP 2036

Source: CUI.

December 19, 2008


FIGURE 7‐2 ULTRA‐HIGH EFFICIENCY SCENARIO MAP 2036

Source: CUI.

December 19, 2008


The third map, Figure 7‐3, outlines where alternative energy systems can be located. All energy sources reviewed for displaying natural gas are presented including, solar hot water, energy sharing, solar air, and district energy. The location of solar hot water is extensive and requires nearly all low‐rise residential roof tops to be utilized. Energy sharing opportunities are located only in industrial areas where there is an opportunity to capture waste heat from industrial processes and is associated with the potential for district energy.

For electricity displacement, only photovoltaics are presented on the map for illustrative purposes. Wind energy opportunities are highly dependent on wind speed and the widespread application within Calgary is limited due to suitable land availability. Although wind turbines occupy a relatively small area of land, in order to provide sufficient energy production for Calgary an energy scheme involving a group of wind turbines would be required over a larger area to prevent aerodynamic interference and the impairment of performance. One area identified by City of Calgary staff for the potential of an inner urban wind‐turbine farm is in the North West part of Calgary.48

The majority of biomass locations within the city, such as waste treatment facilities and landfills, are already harnessed for electricity production through the conversion and use of methane. Every opportunity to harness new sources of biomass, such as the development of an anaerobic digester for a new wastewater treatment facility, can contribute to the production of electricity and further offset Calgary’s GHG emissions. As noted earlier, if additional generation technologies are built within the boundaries of the city, such as the proposed Shepard Energy Centre, consideration should be given to whether systems can include the use of biomass. Increasing the application of biomass can further reduce the use of other alternative energy sources, such as solar hot water, which would reduce costs and improve implementation. Instead of thousands of solar hot water collectors, only a few central biomass facilities would be required.

With improvements in technology for photovoltaics changing rapidly, it is anticipated that the capital and operating costs will come down over the next 28 years and improve the financial performance of these systems. At the same time, there are a number of programs and incentive packages operating to encourage the development and installation of photovoltaics, including a proposed energy consumer package from a local utility provider that will encourage residential building owners to generate local power through solar hot water and photovoltaics and earn credit for excess generation that is fed back into the Alberta electricity grid. This package encourages Calgarians to be generators of electricity and to use the Alberta grid system as a place for energy storage. Recognizing that these types of incentives and utility packages can promote the use of photovoltaics more quickly, the map illustrates where these types of systems might be most applicable.

48 A full wind analysis assessment would need to be undertaken to assess economic and energy production viability.

December 19, 2008


FIGURE 7‐3 LOCATION OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES MAP 2036

Source: CUI.

December 19, 2008


7.3 A REVIEW OF CALGARY LAND USES

An assessment of the various alternative energy sources is provided below for each of the major land use classifications for Calgary. Each table provides the percentage change for each building type expected to occur in each of the land use categories by 2036 and the total GJ/ha using the Ultra High Efficiency building scenario for each of the land use types.

Activity Centres

Over the next 50 years, change and growth is expected to impact most areas of Calgary, particularly the 12 major Activity Centres. These areas are identified as providing a mix of uses that accommodate a significant concentration of jobs and population. The largest and pre‐eminent centre is the Centre City. Among all the land uses for Calgary, Activity Centres have among the higher consistent levels of GJ/ha and are ideally suited to accommodate district energy schemes. As a result of the relatively high capital costs associated with district energy networks, areas that have a high, constant demand for energy, such as the Activity Centres, tend to be more economically justifiable areas to invest in district energy systems.49 Activity centres offer the added benefit of producing a variety of energy demand profiles from the mixed uses that allow district energy plants to run at maximum efficiency in terms of energy production, but also ensure a better return on investment. Types of land configurations located within activity centres that support district energy networks include: multiple buildings and campuses under single ownership, such as universities, hospitals, institutions, retail facilities and government agencies. It is noted that the density of Activity Centres precludes the application of solar hot water technology and photovoltaics for a significant portion of heat supply and electricity generation. This reality further supports the concept of applying district energy technology in Activity Centres.

TABLE 7‐1 ACTIVITY CENTRES PERCENTAGE CHANGE NEW BUILDING TYPE AND GJ/HA

Land Use Residential Commercial Industrial GJ/ha Single

Detached Ground Oriented

ApartmentLow Med High Low Medium High

Centre City ‐16 ‐14 0 0 94 0 0 36 0 14,723Major Activity Centres

‐.7 11 30 11 31 0 21 4 0 30,730

Community Activity Centre

‐11 32 27 36 0 0 16 0 0 3,254

Source: City of Calgary and CUI Model. *Negative number indicates a decrease in an expected building type.

49 Building size is another important determinant for the economic viability of district energy networks. Larger buildings provide a steady revenue source that covers the cost of the energy and amortizes the connection cost. The connection cost per unit tends to be much higher for single family homes than it is for larger residential high‐rises and commercial office buildings.

December 19, 2008


Corridors

The Corridors provide important connections between major destinations within Calgary. Over the next 28 years, the Corridors are expected to support a mix of medium to higher density residential development, commercial and institutional uses adjacent to residential neighbourhoods. Among the priorities for the Corridors is encouraging intensification of people and jobs to support local retail and high order transit. A defining characteristic of the Corridors is the focus on mobility and larger boulevards that create opportunities to encourage solar energy use. The GJ/ha area for urban corridors is significant and adequate to support larger central district energy networks. There is excellent opportunity to interconnect a variety of district energy systems between Major Activity Centres through the Urban Corridors allowing for a city wide district energy network.

Although the GJ/ha for Neighbourhood Corridors is sufficient for the application of district energy, the requirement to have longer runs of piping for areas supported or immediately adjacent to Major Activity Centres and other supportive infrastructure to accommodate an expanded block style of development are not likely to make a district energy system economically viable. Alternatively, solar hot water technologies can be readily accommodated on larger flat roof areas found along Corridors. For instance, solar hot water technologies can be easily retrofitted to accommodate existing types of buildings. Corridors also present an opportunity to improve the technical feasibility and economic viability of solar hot water energy sources by linking several buildings together through smaller distributed networks. The added benefit of integrating multiple systems is the ability to balance out individual loads and take advantage of larger, shared heat storage facilities.

TABLE 7‐2 CORRIDOR PERCENTAGE CHANGE NEW BUILDING TYPE AND GJ/HA

Land Use Residential Commercial Industrial GJ/haSingle



Urban Corridors

‐63 ‐5 81 67 0 0 15 5 0 6,158

Neigh‐ bourhood Corridor

‐1146 249 400 376 0 172 50 0 0 3,057


Developed Communities

Developed communities represent a diversity of residential housing types built between 1930 and 1980. The defining characteristic of these neighbourhoods is a mix of low and medium density and mixed use development patterns that support walking and offer a variety of destinations, in terms of convenient shops, services and community recreational facilities. From an energy perspective, established communities represent the majority of the built environment that requires extensive energy retrofits to achieve a minimum energy reduction of 25 percent. Among the alternative energy sources examined suited to a majority of the homes located within established Calgary communities is solar hot water for heat. Photovoltaics, although not required for electricity generation needs, can also be supported in these communities.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 7‐3 DEVELOPED PERCENTAGE CHANGE NEW BUILDING TYPE AND GJ/HA

Land Use Residential Commercial Industrial GJ/ha Single Detached Ground Oriented Apartment

Low Med High Low Medium High Inner City ‐457 343 36 0 0 ‐21 0 0 0 2,025Established 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,081Recent Communities

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,952


Developing Communities

It is expected that development in Calgary over the next 10 years will continue along the edges of the City, although the majority of growth will be directed towards the Activity Centres and Corridors. Developing communities represent the best opportunity to achieve high levels of energy efficiency. A good example of a new development integrating high efficiency improvements is the McKenzie Towne development. This development is drawing on the use of solar hot water collectors and natural gas fired geothermal loops to reduce overall energy consumption and energy cost for new home purchasers. The Drake Landing Community in Okotoks is another example of a master planned neighbourhood that has effectively integrated energy efficiency improvements. All homes are built to the R‐2000 and Alberta Built Green Gold Standard and over 90 percent of space heating needs are met through solar hot water collectors. Another larger scale sustainable community design is Dockside Green in Victoria, British Columbia. All buildings at Dockside are designed to achieve a 50 percent energy efficiency improvement over the MNECB and are supported by a neighbourhood 2MW biogasification district energy plant fuelled with wood waste. Each of the systems have required changes to permitted building designs, as well as zoning and setbacks to accommodate maximum passive solar gain, as well as active solar support for titled surfaces.

TABLE 7‐4 DEVELOPING PERCENTAGE CHANGE NEW BUILDING TYPE AND GJ/HA




Unplanned Residential

64 8 11 7 0 9 1 0 0 420

Planned Residential 84 3 0.5 0 0 12 0.5 0 0 1,604Major Activity Seton 0 14 29 10 31 0 13 3 0 4,425


Industrial Areas

Calgary has a number of large industrial areas in the northeast around the airport, southeast and in the central part of the city. It is anticipated that all industrial areas will continue to have tracts of land with the flexibility to accommodate the intermixing of various industrial types. Industrial areas represent an excellent opportunity to encourage energy efficiency improvements through partnerships and networks amongst industry. An emerging district planning approach in Alberta is the designation of eco‐industrial parks. The first eco‐industrial park was opened in Hinton, Alberta. The eco‐park was part of a larger strategy to encourage local

December 19, 2008


economic growth by attracting green enterprises and incorporates a number of progressive design guidelines through zoning, including the requirement for all buildings to be 25 percent better than the MNECB and that all developers consider using passive solar heating, active solar heating, and energy sharing through district energy networks. Two types of energy sources examined are well suited to industrial locations, particularly energy sharing (capture of waste heat from industrial processes) and solar air. Commercial and institutional facilities require a high volume of make‐up air to meet indoor air quality standards. The Solar Wall is one technology that can preheat air before it enters the building and displace a sizeable amount of energy required by commercial and industrial users. The capture of waste heat from industrial processes through district energy networks is also viable in industrial areas across Calgary, where there is a higher GJ/ha. As a result of the vary energy demands in industrial areas due to processing, specific alternative energy assessment options should be carried out for all industrial areas in Calgary.

TABLE 7‐5 INDUSTRIAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE NEW BUILDING TYPE AND GJ/HA




Industrial Residential Mix

‐0.04 0 24 3 0 0 0 0 73 3,338

Business Industrial

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 1,281

Established Industrial

‐7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 1,130

Standard Industrial

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 703

Source: City of Calgary and CUI Model *Negative number indicates a decrease in an expected building type.

From the new intensification redevelopment directions being proposed for major Activity Centres and Corridors in the city, a wide range of alternative energy sources can be accommodated over time, particularly district energy. At the same time, new neighbourhoods, especially in Developing Communities, will need to promote a diversity of housing choice, as well as commercial and local employment opportunities that are structured to be compatible with the integrated energy planning and conservation strategy outlined in this study.

7.4 ENERGY AND CALGARY LAND USE PRIORITIES

Calgary’s projected energy pattern directly contributes to and supports the key policy directions for land use and mobility established by the City of Calgary. Managing where and how growth will be accommodated over the next 25 – 50 years will be important not only for ensuring that the natural environment is protected and that Calgary’s economy can remain strong and communities inviting and vibrant, but also affordable in terms of energy cost and supportive in terms of meeting Calgary’s proposed community GHG emissions reduction target.

Providing for a balanced approach between Established Communities and New Greenfield Communities will contribute to enhancing transit service, while also improving the energy distribution and consumption pattern for Calgary. Also,

December 19, 2008


directing growth in newly developing areas can provide an ideal opportunity to advance the use and application of various integrated urban energy systems to develop smaller distributed networks for meeting domestic hot water and space heating needs.

Across Calgary, the higher energy intensity patterns reflect the importance placed on encouraging higher density development, such as along Corridors and within Major Activity Centres to support the existing and planned expansions for the LRT system and other transit options. Increasing density in these areas achieves a variety of priorities from a greater diversity of housing choices to more concentrated local employment and retail opportunities in a more compact urban form. It also supports the location of district energy facilities that can integrate a variety of fuel types, including biomass.

The encouragement of intensification along Corridors and connecting the Activity Centres by a series of mixed‐use streets complements the use of solar hot water systems, particularly in a distributed energy generation scheme, as well as photovoltaics. The opportunity to optimize existing public infrastructure to capture rejected heat from municipal services, such as waste water treatment facilities and other biomass sources are also supported by the energy profile of Calgary.

How the city chooses to manage growth and energy with future development will require that policy from the strategic planning level through to the implementation strategies links the goal of connecting Calgary’s proposed community GHG target to strategies to implementation.

December 19, 2008


8 OVERCOMING CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTING THE ENERGY MAP: STRATEGIES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

The integrated energy approach developed for the Calgary recommends high standards of energy efficiency for the built environment to reduce demand for energy and a package of alternative energy supply sources that can significantly reduce energy costs, while also improving security of energy for the safe operation of businesses and residences. The principles for an integrated and energy efficient design are well established for the city. In order to implement them, it will be necessary to disseminate the information and have support from a broad range of local stakeholders to implement. Utilities and private sector agencies will want to invest in alternative energy sources that have established markets to serve and can provide a reliable return on investment. It can also be expected that the City of Calgary will want to invest in energy efficiency programs, but might lack the immediate capital to do so because of restricted budgets.

Considering the magnitude of the capital investments proposed and the preliminary economic feasibility assessment developed, a full sensitivity and financial strategy should be prepared to better account for the capital phasing and financing arrangements that could be undertaking by the City of Calgary or other private sector firms to advance the development of the integrated energy planning strategy in addition to land use and mobility policies.

Overcoming the challenges to the implementation of the energy map will require innovative approaches that encourage community support, reduce capital costs and the requirement to make energy part of the official planning and development process for all land use decisions. The policy recommendations put forward are designed to help the City of Calgary consolidate its position as a leader in energy efficiency and provide direction on connecting land use and energy efficiency.

Integrate Energy Objectives into the MDP

An important policy step that municipalities are taking to encourage action on energy issues is incorporating energy objectives into various official documents, such as a municipal development plan (MDP). Success in locating alternative energy sources for communities, such as Strathcona, Alberta; Markham, Ontario; and North Vancouver, B.C. have commenced with incorporating energy principles or specific technologies into the long‐term sustainability objectives of the community, forming part of the vision for the future of a city.

For the City of Winnipeg, the local Council adopted broad energy efficiency principles for Plan Winnipeg that recognized the importance of using integrated planning to reduce motorized transport and promote compact urban form and mixed land uses. The long‐range plan also explicitly outlined that energy efficiency should be encouraged through land use tools in subdivision design, land use

December 19, 2008


A. Recommend Action: The City of Calgary adopts the following energy principles within the Municipal Development Plan:

• Promote energy efficiency building design and practices for all building types, residential, commercial, institutional and industrial.

• Encourage planning, design and construction of energy efficient neighbourhoods and buildings to reduce energy consumption and to lower greenhouse gas emissions through policies to be incorporated into the plan.

• Minimize the physical separation of activities and to encourage development density that supports mass transportation and the application of district energy systems.

planning, home retrofitting and building code requirements, and incentives provided to encourage energy efficiency.

Incorporating energy related objectives within the Calgary MDP will establish an important policy foundation that will contribute to guiding staff, residents and local developers for the next five to ten years or more. The establishment of the objectives should be done in cooperation with community stakeholders to improve the uptake and support for energy efficiency improvements. The language adopted within the MDP should be general enough to accommodate changes in planning directions and technology, while providing confidence to all City of Calgary staff to undertake robust energy planning measures from day one. Going beyond the MDP, all Area Structure Plans (ASPs), Community Plans (CPs) and Area Redevelopment Plans (ARPs) should also include direction and guidance for achieving energy objectives. The GJ/ha metric can be used to guide the overall energy expectations for development in all plans and can be monitored through energy certification forms discussed below.

Adopt The Energy Maps

Alternative energy systems, such as the district energy, are more cost effective, in terms of financial and economic performance, when they are connected and integrated to serve a large number of buildings. Across Canada, the use of alternative energy sources has been restricted for a variety of reasons including:

• Cost in terms of long and short term returns on investment; • Concern that alternative energy systems can over complicate the planning

and development process; • Difficulty in coordinating planning among various agencies and interest

groups involved with alternative energy sources; • Permitting, zoning and regulatory constraints.

Incorporating alternative energy sources into the planning process and municipal bylaws can support the rapid up‐take and application of energy sources. Land use policies are at the top of the energy management decision making process and can directly impact on the energy decisions at the building or site level. The Ultra High Efficiency Map and Alternative Energy Map, establishes an energy management hierarchy that encourages application of specific energy sources, such as district

December 19, 2008


energy, photovoltaics and solar hot water for a variety of land uses. Developing energy zones to designate priority areas for building energy improvements or the application of alternative energy sources based on the energy map, can provide the City of Calgary with a land use approach to encourage an energy efficient built environment.

Communities, such as the City of North Vancouver, B.C., and a number of communities in Europe including Vaxjo, Sweden and Saarbrucken, Germany have created energy zones. Energy zones are intended to set out specific development standards for building design and development in terms of energy efficiency, as well as encourage the application of alternative energy sources within a community. For the City of North Vancouver, a service area bylaw was adopted that established priorities for the development of a district energy system and introduced the requirement for buildings to connect to the service. The policy follows the precedent relating to provisions for sidewalks, roads, sewer connections and stormwater management. A similar bylaw is to be introduced in the City of Whitehorse that will mandate the requirement to minimize energy standards in all new buildings.

In the City of Toronto, blanket zoning has been introduced to encourage the direct application of renewable energy and generation and distribution. In March of this year, the City of Toronto introduced a zoning bylaw to allow for the capture, selling and distribution of energy using renewable energy sources or a district energy CHP system. The zoning bylaw is designed to encourage the wider uptake of renewable systems by providing “as‐of‐right” zoning permission. This enables business owners and residents to not have to proceed with minor variance changes or other regulatory building permissions in order to save energy and reduce GHGs.50

In addition to using energy zones and land use bylaws, there is also the requirement to update the Ultra High Efficiency Map and Alternative Energy Map when the Calgary MDP is reviewed. As new development occurs in planned greenfields and infill and redevelopment becomes established for major parts of Centre City and other Major Activity Centres, changes will have occurred in the energy pattern for Calgary. These changes will need to be accounted for in terms of meeting the proposed community GHG target for Calgary, as well as for the use of alternative energy sources. Some municipalities, such as the City of Boston, are developing interactive on‐line maps to help residents and businesses understand the importance of energy in a community and to promote active monitoring of energy.

50 The zoning bylaw was introduced in accordance with a new comprehensive incentive program for home and business owners to encourage retrofits and the installation of alternative energy systems.

December 19, 2008


B. Recommend Action: The City of Calgary adopts the ultra‐high efficiency scenario map and alternative energy sources map as part of the Municipal Development Plan. The maps should be updated from time to time, in keeping with the schedule for updating the Municipal Development Plan. Consideration should also be provided to developing a version of the maps for on‐line use to promote energy efficiency and conservation.

Encourage Higher Building Standards Using Indicators

The success of integrated energy planning and development can be measured in terms of minimizing the cost of meeting social and economic needs of a city, where costs incorporate all externalities of urban consumption. Energy focused land use, siting and building regulations can achieve this by reducing energy demand or the rate of growth of energy demand by minimizing the energy requirement. Selecting the right indicators to monitor the level of energy consumption for a community can be challenging, since decision‐making is increasingly requiring complex technical and institutional information to make efficient and equitable urban development decisions.

The use of the GJ/ha and other monitoring measures, such as the cost of C02e/yr, can provide high level guidance for decision makers. Understanding how the decision to approve a development can impact Calgary’s overall energy use and GHG goals can be achieved through a variety of planning and building approval polices.

One approach that has garnered wide recognition as a best practice for integrating policy with objectives and targets, and monitoring energy reduction is the use of sustainability checklists. Checklists can serve as either a regulatory or non‐regulatory measure as part of the building approval process. Checklists are usually adopted through a bylaw and requires that the checklist be completed as part of either a permit application or rezoning requirement.

Two successful examples of checklists are the Markham Centre Performance Measures and Port Coquitlam Sustainability Checklist. Both performance checklists were initiated from sustainable statements outlined in municipal development plans, which identified the checklist requirements and its objective.

Since the late 1990s, Markham has worked to integrate the concepts of sustainable development into its planning activities. For the Town’s largest development project, Markham Town Centre, emphasis was placed on creating a complete, self‐contained community with minimal impact on the environment. To improve the uptake of sustainable building, the Town introduced the Markham Performance Measures and Checklist. The measures have worked to implement broader community goals and expectations, while the checklist is used to integrate performance indicators and targets. For instance, in addition to setting high standards for promoting mixed‐land use and encouraging design that reduces dependency on the automobile, the Town also set a target to lower energy consumption by 30 percent.

December 19, 2008


C. Recommended Action: The City of Calgary undertakes to:

• Develop an energy certification process as part of the Land Use Bylaw to be submitted with applications for re‐designation, subdivision, development permit or building permits that outlines the specific heat loss calculations and approaches to improve energy efficiency.

• Prepare a development, building and rezoning sustainability checklist that uses the GJ/ha metrics developed for each land use and the approach referenced in the Municipal Development Plan.

All development within the Markham Centre is evaluated using the performance checklist. This approach has led to raising the design bar in development applications from developers for all buildings being proposed in the Town Centre (generally designed to LEED® silver or MNECB plus 25), and encourages the density and heat demand required to support the combined heat and power district energy system, which is helping to improve the overall energy management and performance of the community.

The checklist for Markham has evolved to the development of a comprehensive energy certification form that must be submitted with every development application. The form requires an applicant to provide detailed measures on the energy standards incorporated into a proposed building. Both the checklist and the certification form provide the Town with a consistent set of information to monitor the energy demand and GHGs in the Town.

A similar initiative was launched by the City of Port Coquitlam in B.C. As part of the City’s Official Community Plan, all land development applications, both rezoning and development permits, are required to the apply the Triple Bottom Line Sustainability Checklist. The checklist was designed to indicate how well proposals were meeting the community goals outlined in the Official Community Plan and Corporate Strategic Plan.

The City of Calgary can take the process of checklists and energy certification forms one step further by linking it to an EnerGuide audit. Through the ecoEnergy program established by NRCan, several programs are available to assist homeowners and businesses to validate the design of new buildings. The program is recognized by such organizations as the Canada Green Building Council for LEED® Canada and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Calgary can use the heat loss calculation to inform building owners about other areas where energy efficiency might be improved.

Leverage Existing Incentive Programs

It is well understood that when the monetary value of energy savings is assessed against the initial capital cost outlays, many consumers and corporations choose to not make investments in energy efficiency. In many cases, energy users tend to discount future savings at rates well in excess of market rates for borrowing or

December 19, 2008


D. Recommend Action: The City of Calgary advance the development of proposed incentives for encouraging green building for all building types (residential, commercial, institutional and industrial) and that the incentives be targeted towards land use areas that have the highest GJ/ha.

saving. However, strictly increasing supply of energy only will result in much higher energy costs to consumers. This can result in consumers having to pay down new capital costs of energy infrastructure through their energy bills, and possibly foregoing their own investments to reduce energy consumption.

The use of market incentives and municipal developed and operated building improvement programs can contribute to addressing this market challenge and can assist consumers to not only reduce their own energy costs, but also do so in the context of rising energy prices. Expanding market incentive initiatives and performance contracting programs already under consideration by the City of Calgary will be required. For instance, the City is currently developing a process to fast track sustainable buildings. The City of Chicago has experienced excellent success with this program. In the first year of operation in 2005, over 30 buildings were processed. Among the success of the Chicago program was the appointment of a designated building approval process engineer who served as an expediter on moving building permit applications quickly through various departments.

Calgary is also exploring additional rebate programs to encourage the development of Net‐Zero building and the potential to apply density bonuses as part of RP and ASP to encourage the application of green building technologies. Simon Fraser University, UniversCity Community Trust has developed a comprehensive green bonus program allowing up to 10 percent for density green building features. For instance, alternative energy systems can receive a 10 percent bonus for installing a renewable energy system to meet 50 percent of a buildings energy load, including space heating and domestic hot water. All of these initiatives will be required to encourage higher standards of building energy efficiency.

Work with the Community and Implement a Detailed Financial Implementation Strategy

Moving the energy maps forward will be dependent on the participation and support of the local communities. imagineCalgary has allowed residents and business owners alike to become well‐informed about environmental issues and establishes a clear direction for improving energy efficiency within the built environment and encouraging more local alternative generation.

Although community members might be supportive of reducing reliance on centralized energy, encouraging alternative sources of energy and reducing GHG emissions, the gap between words and action can be large. The integrated energy planning strategy put forward in this report is based on the requirement for significant construction of energy systems on private property and the need for Calgary wide energy efficiency retrofits of buildings. Although the required

December 19, 2008


investments from a broader community perspective are sound in terms of reducing GHG emissions, individual property owners may not have adequate access to capital or may perceive that the necessary capital expenditures as unwarranted due to other commitments or the potential to not be remaining long enough to benefit from energy savings. Even if it is economically efficient to carry out energy efficiency improvements, people and businesses are often unable to do so, simply because they cannot raise the necessary funds.

Introducing larger scale retrofit programs at the municipal level might also be a challenge. There are a number of competing infrastructure priorities for the City of Calgary and the potential for budget shortfalls that may make investments in building retrofit activities involving significant investment over a protracted period of time unattractive.

Successfully engaging the local community to embrace and support a development process focused around energy efficiency has been achieved through the use of a Community Energy Plans (CEP). A number of communities across Canada have successfully developed some form of a CEP to integrate energy issues associated with transportation, supply and end‐use.

CEPs work to engage local members of the community, usually major stakeholders, such as utilities, large industries and other energy consumers, to develop a vision for energy reduction that extends out 50‐100 years. Central to the success of CEPs, is the identification of demand side management practices, including improved building energy efficiency, the integration of renewable and local energy sources as a means of reducing the dependence on fossil fuels and engaging the community to manage its own energy use and delivery more effectively (Appendix D provides a broader overview of the benefits of CEPs). These activities have already been undertaken by Calgary.

The development of a CEP would complement the integrated energy approach put forward in this report and provide for a Calgary wide comprehensive approach to financing the initiatives, as well as addressing the energy and GHG emissions associated with transportation and industry processing. The CEP study would allow for the identification of how specific strategies could be used to encourage improved energy performance within the built environment. Specifically, the CEP should be used to provide direction for the ASPs, the CPs and ARPs to assess energy needs for new growth in terms of redesignations and subdivision planning and existing individual communities.

For instance an ASP or the ARPs might include the requirement for detailed pre‐feasibility studies of district energy systems to contribute to a city wide interconnected network of piping and the types of setbacks, rights‐of‐ways and other land use policies that should be established to encourage and protect the opportunity for district energy or other types of distributed energy systems.

As part of the implementation of the integrated energy plan, a detailed financial strategy needs to be developed as part of the CEP that accommodates the needs

December 19, 2008


E. Recommend Action: The City of Calgary prepares a Community Energy Plan. The plan should undertake to:

• Develop a detailed financial implementation strategy for the Ultra High Efficiency Map and Alternative Energy Sources Map. The strategy should include the potential to use local improvement charges to accelerate energy efficiency building retrofits and improvements in new buildings.

• Develop detailed policy direction for achieving the GJ/ha metric prepared for each land use in area structure plans, community plans and area redevelopment plans.

• Provide an assessment of the regulatory authority required for the City of Calgary to administer higher levels of energy performance standards for all building applications.

• Prepare a comprehensive review of transportation emissions and identify the specific measures needed to achieve equivalent reductions in transportation to meet the 2050 GHG goal.

and expectations of individual citizens and businesses. The financial analysis would provide the City of Calgary with the required overview of the investment program required and what types of lenders, investors and associations could be called upon to finance the strategy.

The financial strategy could look also explore a range of capital financing options, including the use of Local Improvement Charges (LIC) and a Community Revitalization Levy (CLV). LICs have been widely applied by municipalities to help cover the costs of infrastructure improvements (roads, sidewalk, etc.) deemed to benefit a specific neighbhourhood. LIC are normally used when a municipality provides new or replacement services to one or more properties, such as road paving. The benefiting landowners are assessed the LICs on their property taxes until their share of the improvements have been paid for.

The main advantage of an LICs is that if associates the repayment of the cost of a project with the building property rather than the current building owners. This is an attractive incentive mechanism to overcome the challenge of reluctant owners who are hesitant to lay out the upfront costs associated with energy efficiency upgrades if they are unsure they will remain long enough to enjoy the operational costs savings. The use of LICs to finance energy management improvements has been limited with the exception of the Yukon Territory. An added benefit of using LICs is to encourage energy efficiency improvements in new buildings or the retrofit of existing buildings is that there is no additional net cost to the City of Calgary.

CLVs, which are similar to the widely applied versions of Tax Increment Financing arrangements used in the United States and here in Canada, including in Ontario for Brownfield remediation, have been used to fund The Rivers District Community Revitalization Plan. CLVs can contribute to community economic development by injecting needed revenue for infrastructure priorities and, in turn, can attract larger‐scale private sector development and investment. CLVs offer a secure and stable form of funding for up to 20 years. The Rivers District CLV offers an applicable option for future capital financing of major projects, such as the energy efficiency improvements and alternative energy source capital initiatives identified in this study.

December 19, 2008


9 CONCLUSION From the integrated energy planning assessment prepared, three central elements underpin the success of the Calgary Energy Map going forward:

• The first is to use energy efficiency improvements to serve as a catalyst to curb energy demand and reduce environmental risks;

• The second is to maximize alternative energy systems; • The third is to use district energy with a CHP system as a means to not only

manage the thermal needs of energy consumers at the building and at the community level, but to also apply it as an approach to meet community planning objectives, such as the establishment of mixed use, compact communities.

Following an integrated design and development approach can offer Calgary an entirely different way of examining how to achieve energy needs by assessing opportunities to lower energy use across the entire city, improve the energy efficiency and operating performance of buildings, effectively turn local sources of heat waste from industry into energy assets and approach district energy as an energy management strategy to meet sustainable development objectives.

December 19, 2008


APPENDICES

December 19, 2008


APPENDIX A ― IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN CANADA

December 19, 2008


APPENDIX B ― ENERGY AND MAPPING METHODOLOGY

The methodology is broken down into five (5) phases: Floor space, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), Cost, and Alternative Energy Sources assessment.

Floor space

Floor space includes all area that consumes energy. For example, if a residential apartment building has 75m2 per floor, but is 10 stories high, the amount of floor space for that building would be 75m2*10=750m2.

The floor space phase was broken down into two parts to facilitate more accurate calculations: Existing Buildings and New Buildings.

Existing Buildings: Total amounts of floor space were calculated from data provided on the assessment role.

New Buildings: The City of Calgary provided CUI with future population projections for the year 2036. In addition to population, future data for people per unit (ppu), and total units expected were also provided. From this information, total future floor space for the year 2036 was calculated. Growth between the years of 2008 and 2036 was assumed to be linear. All new development was assumed to be accommodated in vacant land. Additional population not accounted for in the population forecast for people per unit calculations were allocated to high rise buildings through the addition of floors across the city. A similar approach was used to accommodate additional office space through the allocation of floors to commercial office high‐rise.

Energy

Building Types

The total floor space for both existing and new buildings were further broken down into seven (7) categories based on relative energy demand. The categories along with descriptions are as follows:

Table 1: Building type classification based on energy consumption.

Building Typology Definition

1. Residential Low Rise Single family detached units including accessory units.

2. Residential Medium High Rise

Units up to three stories (duplex, townhouse, row house etc).

3. Residential High Rise Units above four storeys.

4. Commercial Office Quality office developments at all sizes and all classes.

5. Commercial Retail All forms of retail (grocery, big box etc.)

6. Industrial All forms of industry.

7. Institutional All other buildings types (Calgary municipal services, hospitals, schools and colleges and university).

December 19, 2008


Energy Efficiency Scenarios

Three (3) possible energy scenarios were considered: Business as Usual (BAU), High Efficiency (HE), and Ultra‐High Efficiency (UHE). However, only two scenarios were mapped BAU and UHE. Their descriptions are given below.

Business As Usual Definition

Existing Buildings No Retrofit

New Buildings All new buildings built to conventional present day practices

High Efficiency Definition

Existing Buildings Retrofit all existing buildings to consume 10 percent less energy

New Buildings All new buildings built to MNECB + 25 percent energy standard

Ultra‐High Efficiency Definition

Existing Buildings Retrofit all existing buildings to consume 25 percent less energy New Buildings All new buildings built to MNECB + 25% energy standard

Energy Intensity Factors (EIF)

An energy intensity factor (EIF) provides information about how much energy a building consumes. It is given in terms of energy/area, or in our case Giga‐Joules per square metre (GJ/m2).

For each energy scenario, each building type, for both existing and new buildings was assigned a unique energy intensity factor for gas consumed and electricity consumed. Therefore a total of (3 energy scenarios)*(7 building types)*(existing and new)*(gas and electricity)=3*7*2*2 = 84 EIFs were calculated.

Existing EIFs:

Relative EIFs for existing buildings were calculated from available information on energy consumption in existing building sectors. Calgary specific energy intensity factors were determined based on the actual utility data provided for Calgary and the total square footage of each building type assembled from the City of Calgary assessment role and other data sources.

Efficiency scenarios (Case II and III) for existing buildings were fixed at 10 percent and 25 percent reductions from the calculated current consumption EIFs. Proportional reductions were applied to both the electricity and natural gas EIFs assuming that actual energy‐efficiency retrofits would depend on the specific building and could address either electricity or natural gas consumption in that building.

EIFs for existing buildings are relative to one another and the total amount of energy in the city was divided up among the different building types accordingly.

• Business as Usual (BAU): EIFs from Existing Calgary Data

December 19, 2008


• High‐Efficiency: (BAU EIFs)*(0.90) • Ultra High Efficiency: (BAU EIFs)*(0.75)

Thus for existing buildings the high efficiency and ultra‐high efficiency scenarios used 10 percent and 25 percent less energy respectively, than the Business as Usual case.

New EIFs:

All new energy intensity factors were based on the Model National Energy Code for Canada (MNECB). Annual consumption for Calgary in the year 2007 was not used to calculate these. Rather, these EIFs were based only on the MNECB standard.

• Business as Usual: MNECB • High‐Efficiency: MNECB ‐25% • Ultra High Efficiency: MNECB‐50% New construction EIFs were determined using the Natural Resources Canada Office of Energy Efficiency Screening Tool for New Building Design. The Screening Tool is designed to estimate the energy performance of proposed building designs and compare that energy performance to a baseline building design to meet the Model National Energy Code for Buildings. The current practice scenario (Case I) was modelled using design choices based on a lowest first‐cost approach. Were appropriate, building code was used to determine the current practice building approaches.

In general the following building parameters were adjusted to determine the EIF for conventional new construction:

• Window to Wall Ratio • Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning System Type • Window Insulating Value • Cooling Efficiency • Heating Efficiency • Heating Plant Type • Lighting Power Density • Lighting Controls • Wall Insulating Value • Roof Insulating Value • Heat Recovery System Efficiency (if present) • Domestic Hot Water Efficiency • Low‐flow Water Fixture Water Savings

It is important to note that the building parameters modelled varied based on the seven building types studied. For example, current practice window‐to‐wall ratios are different for low‐rise residential and commercial office.

December 19, 2008


To determine the Case II and III EIFs, the above building parameters were modified to produce a building performance at the target levels (25 percent or 50 percent below the MNECB energy code). The building parameters were modified so that the most economical (quickest payback) measures were implemented first until the target energy levels were achieved. Because energy improvements were applied based on their economic performance, changes to the EIF for the new construction are not equally applied to both natural gas and electricity.

Total Energy

To calculate the total energy consumed for each EIF Scenario, the appropriate EIF was multiplied by the total floor space of each building type. The total amount of energy for all of the building types were summed to get the total amount of energy required for each energy scenario.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)

GHG emissions were calculated based on two different energy types: Natural Gas and Electricity. To calculate total GHG emissions, a GHG coefficient in terms of [tones CO2e / GJ], was multiplied by the total amount of energy (GJ) for each scenario. The GHG coefficient was taken from the “2003 Calgary Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory” report. The model applied constant GHG emissions per GJ for electricity. If expansion of the grid involves lower GHG intensive electricity this could be accounted for.51 However, the analysis projects reduced future demand for Alberta grid electricity. Therefore, reduced GHG intensity for grid electricity will only occur if existing generation facilities are replaced or if the hierarchy of use of generation facilities changes. This report provided GHG coefficients for both gas and electricity for Calgary.

Electricity

It was assumed that all electricity supplied to Calgary is supplied by the grid and that this electricity was provided primarily by both natural gas and coal fired power plants. The GHG coefficient for electricity in Calgary that was used is 252.5 [kg CO2e‐

/GJ] or 0.2525 [tonnes CO2e/GJ]. Generation and transmission losses are included in this coefficient.

Natural Gas

The GHG coefficient for natural gas was taken from the same report and is: 49.95 [kg CO2e/GJ] or 0.04995 [tonnes CO2e/GJ]. This coefficient assumes the natural gas is burned in a boiler of 100 percent efficiency. The average boiler efficiency in Calgary was assumed to be 70 percent, therefore the GHG coefficient that was used was 0.04995/0.7 = 0.071357 tonnes/GJ.

51 For this study, it is estimated that the demand for grid electricity needs to fall from 33 million GJ/year to 26 million GJ/year in order to achieve Calgary’s proposed community GHG target. Subsequently, the assumption that the lower amount of grid electricity is based on the existing mix is reasonable.

December 19, 2008


Cost

Present day cost calculations were done in a similar manner to GHG calculations. A cost coefficient of [$/GJ] was calculated for both electricity and natural gas. For natural gas, cost information provided directly from ATCO was used. For electricity, historical prices of electricity from June 2007 to September 2008 were averaged and used.

The cost coefficient was multiplied by the total amount of energy to yield the total cost for each scenario.

Alternative Energy Sources and Mapping

In order for Calgary to meet the proposed community GHG reduction goal, it was assessed that the ultra‐high energy efficiency scenario was the preferred option. The alternative energy sources were applied to this scenario only.

Alternative energy technologies were selected based on two criteria:

1) The technology had to be proven over time.

2) Applicability to Calgary’s land use.

Information for each alternative energy source included:

• Installation cost [$/GJ] • Operating Cost [$/GJ/yr] • CO2 Emissions [kg/GJ/yr] • Maximum applicability to the Calgary built form [%] • Maximum building floor area applicable [%]

From these factors, total applicable energy (GJ) was calculated and the total amount of GHG emissions associated with this was determined. The factor [cost/tonne GHG reduction] where cost is given in terms of 10 percent capital cost + operating cost was calculated. This factor was used to create a hierarchy of alternative energy sources. The most cost effective alternative energy source was applied to maximize its energy displacement first, and then the next most cost effective alternative energy source was applied second, and so on. The alternative energy sources were applied to the most appropriate land use designations, until there was enough GHG reduction for Calgary to reach the 2050 building reduction goal. The allocation of alternative technologies was developed by assigning the highest GJ/ha to energy sources, such as district energy, which benefit from a higher thermal density first and other alternative energy sources to lower GJ/ha areas based on two factors. The first was based on the amount of GJ displacement allocated for each alternative energy source and the second was assessed by technology limitations, building restrictions and geographical limitations.

All calculations were carried out using current energy prices. No value was assumed for GHG reductions. If a value is attached to GHG reductions then the payback periods and economics would improve. The economic analysis reviewed the energy

December 19, 2008


price scenarios varying from constant energy costs and confirmed that the approach taken in this study was valid for varying energy prices.

December 19, 2008


APPENDIX C ― MNECB ENERGY EFFICIENCY DESIGN APPROACH FOR CALGARY BUILDINGS

New Construction Impacts

Addressing energy performance at the time of construction remains the most effective way to achieve drastic improvements in building energy performance. The discussion below presents the building upgrades that would be required for each major building form to achieve energy consumption levels 25 percent and 50 percent below the Canadian Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB).

Residentia l

Low‐rise and mid‐rise residential construction could achieve the target of 25 percent below the MNECB by instituting a combination of improved efficiency in the mechanical heating equipment (furnace or boiler), higher levels of insulation in both the walls and the roof, and by reducing the energy consumption related to lighting. Because residential dwelling units are relatively low occupancy areas, improving the building envelope will reduce overall energy consumption significantly in the Calgary climate. Improving energy further (to approximately 50 percent below MNECB levels) would require further improvements to the systems mentioned above coupled with high‐performance window units, and the installation of heat recovery systems on exhaust air. While high‐performance windows can directly replace conventional windows, the inclusion of a heat recovery system requires special consideration during the design stages of a project.

To meet the 25 percent target in high‐rise residential construction, the focus is on a balanced approach to the window to wall ratio in the building, improved window performance, and mechanical systems efficiency (heating and cooling if applicable). Also, because high‐rise residential dwelling units at typically smaller than other forms of residential, domestic water use per square foot of habitable space is more significant. As a result, addressing domestic hot water systems efficiency and building water fixture efficiency play an important role in achieving the energy targets. To pursue the 50 percent target, high‐rise residential buildings should continue to improve the building envelope while investigating the opportunity for variable speed control and heat recovery within the main mechanical systems.

Commercial

Commercial office buildings can achieve 25 percent saving over the MNECB levels in Calgary via incremental improvements to a number of key building components. Most importantly, office buildings should be designed with a window to wall ratio that balances the daylighting benefits with the thermal performance of the wall structure. Additionally, the efficiency of the lighting systems is critical to allow the building to provide adequate, high‐quality lighting with as little energy consumption as possible. Finally, improvements to the thermal performance of the windows, spandrels, and wall sections will be required to reduce heating and cooling loads in

December 19, 2008


the building. To achieve the 50 percent savings level, consideration should be given by the design team to employing different HVAC systems including potentially four‐pipe fan‐coils, chilled beams, radiant heating/cooling, distributed heat pumps, or underfloor air distribution. The more efficiency HVAC system will have to be coupled with improved efficiency of the main heating and cooling plant and more extensive lighting controls in the building (including daylighting around the building perimeter and occupancy sensors throughout).

Because the largest portion of energy use in commercial retail buildings is related to lighting, the building improvements required to achieve the 25 percent reduction below MNECB target are focused mostly on addressing that end use. The lighting power density of a retail building should be addressed first by eliminating light ineffective lighting and light trespass, reducing over‐lit spaces, and by employing more efficient lighting fixtures (such as fluorescent, compact fluorescent, LED, metal halide, etc). These improvements, combined with small improvements in the efficiency of the base building heating and cooling systems, are likely enough to achieve a 25 percent reduction. For these building types to achieve further energy performance the efficiency lighting systems discussed above will require lighting controls which focus on reducing or eliminate lighting when the spaces are unoccupied or adequate daylight is available from perimeter windows. As the internal heating loads related to the lighting are reduced through efficient design, it becomes more important to upgrade building envelop components including windows, wall and roof for the best available thermal performance.

Inst itutional

Institutional buildings tend to be densely occupied with high thermal comfort requirements. For institutional construction to achieve a 25 percent reduction over MNECB levels, the buildings should incorporate an improved building envelope, reduced lighting power densities, and high‐efficiency HVAC equipment. Additionally, institutional buildings are often positioned to take advantage of improved domestic water heating equipment efficiencies and low‐flow water fixtures to reduce the demand for hot water. Low‐efficiency heat recovery should be investigated by design teams targeting this level of performance. To improve energy performance to the 50 percent below MNECB level, the emphasis will be on specialized lighting controls and further increases to the ventilation systems in the building. Most institutional buildings in Calgary will benefit from a well designed heat recovery or demand controlled ventilation system. An integrated approach including the majority of the measures above will achieve dramatic energy savings when compared to conventional practice.

Industrial

The energy use in industrial buildings depends significantly on the use of the space. As such, this study has focused on the energy consumption related to the base building/building shell of a typical industrial building. Because of the relatively low energy use (per square foot of occupied space) in industrial shell buildings, achieving a 25 percent reduction below MNECB levels is difficult without

December 19, 2008


considering the energy use of the tenant within the space. To achieve a 25 percent reduction below typical energy consumption levels, an industrial building project would have to focus on improving the efficiency of the heating systems used in the building and by improving the efficiency of the lighting systems installed in the project. To push energy consumption even lower, the project would have to address the thermal performance of the walls and roof of the industrial structure and explore the possibility of recovering heat from the building’s exhaust air stream. It is estimated that in Calgary, the combination of all the measure discussed above would result in a 40 percent reduction in base‐building energy consumption compared to typical construction practices.

Existing Building Retrofit Impacts

Due to the nature of building retrofits, economically improving energy performance in existing buildings tends to fewer building systems and typically does not feature the magnitude of performance improvements seen when improving the design of new buildings. The discussion below presents the key opportunities to improve existing energy consumption by 10 percent and 25 percent in each of the seven major building types considered in this modeling exercise.

Residentia l

Similar to the new construction case, lighting in existing residential buildings is responsible for a large portion of energy consumption. Additionally lighting represents an excellent target for retrofit as a result of the number of direct replacement energy efficient technologies available. Coupling a retrofit program with the installation of improved lighting controls in a few key areas (exterior lighting, mechanical/storage spaces) will on average achieve a 10 percent energy savings over. To further improve energy performance, the heating and domestic hot water systems in most existing residential buildings represent an opportunity for energy efficiency improvements. Although the capital cost associated with these retrofits is larger, replacement of furnaces or domestic hot water heaters in low‐ and mid‐rise buildings and central plant equipment in high‐rise residential buildings can provide reasonable payback when coupled with end of life replacement. Typically heating upgrades provide the best value when coupled with envelope air tightness improvements. It is anticipated that the combination of the lighting improvements presented first and the heating improvements presented second should achieve an average of 25 percent energy savings in existing residential buildings.

Commercial

Lighting energy consumption represents a larger percentage of total energy cost in commercial buildings than in any other building type. Both in retail and office scenarios, lighting represents the most easily reduced load. With proper phasing of a lighting retrofit in a commercial building, energy consumption can be reduced by over 10 percent without dramatic impacts on capital budgets. Typically in commercial scenarios, initial lighting retrofits will involve direct one‐to‐one fixture replacement to eliminate the cost of lighting redesign. Technologies are available

December 19, 2008


that will maintain existing lighting levels while improving energy performance in most existing commercial buildings. To further improve energy performance, lighting energy consumption can be addressed further through the incorporation of improved controls. Depending on the scale of the commercial building these controls may include occupancy sensors, vacancy sensors, daylighting controls, local switching, or simply improved central control algorithms. In retail specifically, reducing energy consumption by 25 percent can typically be achieved through a lighting redesign and replacement program.

Inst itutional

As with the building types presented above, institutional buildings will typically target lighting as the most economical method to reduce energy consumption. In addition to one‐to‐one fixture replacements also described above, the variable occupancy nature of most institutional buildings lends itself to the effective use of various lighting control methods. Addressing variable occupancy areas with occupancy/vacancy sensors, lighting timers, improved central control algorithms, photocells and daylight sensors will help to reduce the overall energy consumption of these building types by at least 10 percent. To further improve the overall energy performance of institutional buildings, improved controls can also be improved to the heating, ventilation, and cooling systems to take advantage of savings available in variable occupancy areas. Technologies including variable air volume systems coupled with variable frequency drives, CO2 demand control, or occupancy control can result in dramatic reductions in the amount of energy consumed ventilating and conditioning spaces.

Industrial

Because the base building energy consumption in industrial buildings is relatively low, achieving a reduction in energy consumption of 10 percent will require most buildings in this demographic to target multiple areas of energy consumption. For most industrial buildings savings could be generated via improved lighting controls/switching and upgrades to the efficiency of the main heating equipment serving the space. For most industrial buildings, base building improvements will likely result in between 2 percent and 10 percent total energy savings. To achieve energy savings beyond these levels process efficiencies related to the specific operation of the industrial buildings would have to be targeted. Although the measures would be site specific, the majority of the energy use in industrial buildings is related to internal processes. Measures would include process equipment efficiency improvements, process waste heat recovery, and implementation of other energy efficient technologies.

December 19, 2008


APPENDIX D ― ENERGY PLANNING IN CANADA Among the approaches widely adopted across Canada for integrating energy into the decision‐making process of communities is through the use of integrated community energy planning (CEP).

Community Energy Planning

In Canada, CEPs have been formalized at the federal level through NRCan and organizations such as the Community Energy Association of British Columbia, which have developed comprehensive toolkits and guidelines for municipalities to follow.52 CEPs are premised on the principle that a community should be designed to reduce energy needs first and focus on the local analysis of energy service needs and the means of supplying them. In 1996, the City of Kamloops became one of BC’s first larger communities to develop a systematic, energy community focused plan. Table 1 lists some of the various community energy plans across Canada and their stated energy reduction goal.

CEPs work by engaging local community members to develop a vision for energy reduction that extends out to 50‐100 years, base lining existing measurable targets in all areas of a community including water consumption, grid reliance, trip reduction, and use of alternative, as well as renewable fuels and a wide array of technologies, demand side management techniques and other energy reduction practices that can be incorporated into the long‐term development of a community, such as design guidelines for buildings and strategies for incorporating energy management systems, including district energy.

Central to the success of CEPs, is the integration of renewable and local energy sources as a means of reducing the dependence on fossil fuels and engaging the community to manage its own energy use and delivery more effectively.53

Applying CEPs using an integrated approach provides a community with a different approach for examining how to achieve energy needs by assessing opportunities to lower energy use, improve energy efficiency and operating performance of a building, and to reduce the reliance on single automobile trips.

The energy mapping initiative undertaking for Calgary builds on the fundamental elements of what a CEP attempts to provide, including the establishment of energy and GHG targets, benchmarks and outlines a set of actions that can be undertaken within the built environment to address energy challenges.

52 Natural Resources Canada. 2007. CANMET Energy Technology Centre Natural Resources Canada Community Energy Planning. 53 Community Energy Association. 2006. A Toolkit for Community Energy Planning in British Columbia.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 1 COMMUNITY ENERGY PLANS IN CANADA

City Energy Reduction Goals Actions Indicators Yellowknife Reduce City and community

emissions by 2014. Raise awareness of energy reduction through lobbying and education programs. Encourage adoption of green standards in construction and transportation.

2014 Emission levels by City Operations. 2014 emission levels by the community.

Kamloops Reduce energy‐related capital and operating costs in infrastructure projects. Raise awareness of cost savings for businesses and residents.

Implement alternative transportation technologies and management strategies. Gear new residential and commercial development to leverage transit investments.

Cost and emission savings since implementation of the CEP.

North Vancouver Promote energy efficiency in the building industry, and the use of Community Energy Systems in City‐owned buildings. Encourage the use of efficient renewable energy supply systems in transportation and private and public assets.

Retrofit municipal buildings, and impose new design standards for residential, commercial and institutional buildings. Promote the installation of district energy systems, and the development of a plan to guide developers and future development towards sustainable building and along transit corridors.

Annual GHG consumption and reduction. Measures of social and environmental benefits, and public awareness.

Guelph Improve the competitiveness of City services and attract investment to raise Guelph above international and National average in terms of environmental sustainability.

Improve the efficiency of old buildings and encourage adoption of LEED® standards for new development. Improve the efficiency of transportation systems and the industrial sector through the use of district dnergy systems and alternative fuels.

Investment in all economic sectors. Energy use and GHG emissions per capita in comparison to other cities in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec. Efficiency levels of new construction in comparison to past years.

Halifax Improve the energy efficiency of buildings, transit systems, industry, land use and infrastructure. Demonstrate local government leadership by increasing energy security and educating residents and businesses.

Improve building efficiency by retrofitting existing buildings and promoting EnerGuide standards in new development, eventually reaching LEED® Silver and Gold standards.

Reduction in energy consumption by residential, commercial and industrial sectors. Average EnerGuide Ratings in residential development, and level of energy savings per retrofitted buildings.

Policies

One of the most important policy steps that municipalities are taking is integrating energy objectives into various official documents, such as an municipal development plan (official plans or community official plans), and into policies directed at the building and site level, including development checklists, development permits, energy zoning and other initiatives that encourage energy reduction through increased density. Table 2 provides a summary of energy policies from Canadian municipalities were energy issues have received a high level of uptake.

December 19, 2008


TABLE 2 CANADIAN ENERGY POLICIES

Province Municipality Energy Related Policy Action British Columbia

Maple Ridge Waive or reduce Development Cost Charges for innovative development with a lower economic, social and ecological cost over the long term.

Official Plan

British Columbia

North Vancouver Established a by‐law to create a district energy service area with a requirement that all new or retrofitted buildings over a certain size be connected to and use the district energy system. A wholly owned subsidiary corporation was incorporated the district energy system.

Official Community Plan 2002 Hydronic Heat energy by‐law

British Columbia

Richmond Recommends that buildings over 20,000sqft pursue LEED Gold standards.

High Performance Building Policy

British Columbia

Maple Ridge Reduce/waive development cost charges for innovative development with lower long term costs. A property tax exemption is offered for high rise development in a revitalization area.

Official Plan

British Columbia

City of Port Coquitlam

All applicants for rezoning and development permits are required to complete a sustainability checklist. Developments that meet the checklist requirements will be fast tracked. (In Process) Consider a density bonus program to permit additional density for a development providing a high level of environmental performance. 8.2 Multi family residences achieve a high level of environmental performance standards to LEED silver certification or equivalent. 10. Investigate opportunities of sustainable principles such as LEED into site planning and building design.

Sustainability Checklist Official Plan: Policies for Housing (8), Policies for Design 8.2;10

British Columbia

City of New Westminister

All applicants for rezoning and development permits are required to complete a smart growth development checklist Promote energy efficiency in settlement pattern and building

Smart Growth Development Checklist 2.5 Environment and Riverfront Goals

December 19, 2008


design throughout the City. British Columbia

City of Langford All commercial and residential buildings must be LEED certified or must meet Built Green Standards

Official Community Plan

British Columbia

Ucluelet 5 percent Density bonusing category for the use of LEED design guidelines for new construction or renovation (approved by municipality or international accreditation).

Official Community Plan‐ Land Use Policies (9)

British Columbia

Bowen Island Municipality

Written policy ensures that rezoning applicants must comply with Built Green and have a rating of EnerGuide 80.

Green Building Standards for Residential Re‐Zoning

British Columbia

District of Saanich

Development permit area guidelines include energy efficiency provisions. Grants are used to residential building permit applicants if the building complies with Built Green and EnerGuide.

Community Design Permits and Guidelines

British Columbia

Vancouver EnerGuide for existing housing to determine efficiency, federal incentives to improve energy performance, develop a central shared resource centre for all consumers to refer. Vancouver By law 90.1‐2004 lays out minimum requirements for a building’s envelope, electrical power systems and equipment, lighting, heating, ventilating and air conditioning, service, water heating, and energy management. Establishing city‐owned energy utility corporation to manage energy systems.

Climate Change Action Plan

Alberta Strathcona County Ensure that all urban and rural growth areas must incorporate resource and energy efficiencies of buildings (infrastructure and waste management) into their plans. Aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging energy efficiency in subdivision and building designs. Building permit fee rebate for homebuilders that achieve R2000 or Built Green certification. This program is a voluntary initiative to promote resource efficiency.

Municipal Development Plan ‐Sustainability and Growth Management 4.20 i ‐Environmental Management 8.42.c

Alberta Canmore Green Building Policy requires applicants seeking development/building permits will be required to meet third

Green Building Policy

December 19, 2008


party certification (LEED, R2000, Built Green) or Town of Canmore green building checklist.

Alberta Okotoks All municipal facilities were retrofitted with mechanical/lighting upgrades in 1999 to address the energy consumption. Phase II involves the adoption of solar technologies in select municipal buildings.

Environmentally Safe Practices ii‐i‐a

Yukon Whitehorse Developers for new residential development are encouraged to consider lot layouts and site plans that maximize solar exposure and are energy efficient Local improvement may be charged to property owners. Visual Strategy bylaw is to come into effect 2009. City will implement energy standards for construction of new buildings and use EnerGuide labeling, minimum efficiency requirements, minimum energy standards, and design awards. An Energy Plan is under development.

City of Whitehorse Energy Plan (4.7.3) Rural Electrification Policies (4.3.2)

Manitoba Winnipeg Implementing an energy management plan to improve efficiency, lower costs and decrease emissions. Energy efficient design for future buildings, subdivisions, retrofitting. Positive incentives to encourage energy efficiency. CCAP‐ identify and implement energy projects in civic buildings. Energy conservation strategies by replacing equipment. Civic facilities are encouraged to adopt LEED standards.

Official Plan (5A‐04, 2B‐02)

Ontario Markham All new buildings and additions must provide heat loss/heat gain calculations and submit an energy efficiency certification form. A gold, silver or bronze rating is listed for green technology or adherence to LEED rating.

By‐Law for Construction, Demolition or Change (Schedule B. 2a) Built Form Evaluation of Performance Indicators

Ontario York Region Increase compact development in order to reduce energy consumption. Also according to 5.3.12 area municipalities must use financial tools like development charges and tax increment financing to encourage development that

Official Plan (4.2) High Density Green Buildings

December 19, 2008


conforms to the Official Plan All public facilities over 500sq m must be designed and operated to LEED silver standards Service allocations of 20 percent‐40 percent (silver‐gold) that meet LEED standards. Buildings must be minimum 5 stories and must meet sustainable objectives listed. Letters of credit must be presented if any of the objectives are not met within 12 months of registration. Reducing application process times and allocating more credits for a specific development can be done as well. No reduced development charges or transfer of allocation credits.

Ontario Richmond Hill All new municipal owned buildings over 500 sq ft are to be built to LEED silver standards.

Green Building Policy

Ontario Waterloo Require urban design that encourages innovation and creativity by achieving energy conservation. Encourage compact development, energy efficient site and building design. New constructed buildings should be designed to minimum LEED silver standards and existing buildings should be upgraded. Economic grant and tax reductions for use of alternate materials.

Official Plan (1.7.3)

Ontario Hamilton 3‐ year LEED Pilot Program based on major renovations and new construction evaluates the various level of LEED certification. Funding incentive are available for energy efficient initiatives and may be used for engineering study costs and upgrades. Incentives for ENERGY STAR equipment.

City of Hamilton: Corporate Energy Policy

Ontario Halton Region Encourage local municipalities and development industry to develop innovative housing designs that have good environmental practices, cost‐efficiency and energy and natural resource conservation. Local municipalities must adopt energy conservation policies to improve efficiency as well as promote compact growth. Encourage high efficiency standards and renewable

Sustainable Halton Growth Management Strategy 4.1c Official Plan: Land Stewardship Policy 85 (8); Healthy Communities Policies 176 (2)d

December 19, 2008


energies through LEED certification for new buildings, neighborhood developments.

Ontario Caledon Development charge discount of 5 percent for green technology use and 20‐27.5 percent for LEED standards, applicable for new commercial and industrial buildings.

Green Development Plan

Ontario Toronto Development standards for mid/high rise and low rise defined separately. The standards state existing legislation that includes: 25 percent minimum energy savings requirements and purchasing 25 percent green power for city buildings. The guidelines also include relation to LEED standards, Green Globe and Energy Star.

Toronto Green Development Standards

Ontario Niagara on the Lake

Wind energy system is a permitted use, the following provisions shall apply: site plan control, height exceptions, no advertising on turbines, max of 1 turbine per property, setbacks etc .

Zoning By‐Law 500A‐74: Section 3 Provisions

Ontario Township of Shuniah

The purpose of the proposed zoning amendment would be to allow the permitted use of wind energy systems for electricity production and to set regulations thereto within specified zones.

Zoning By‐Law 2038‐00 Amendment

Nova Scotia Halifax Regional Municipality

Guidelines for wind development along the waterfront were proposed. Accessory road requirements, environmental assessment, buffer distance to water.

Wind Turbine Master Plan

Nova Scotia Town of Digby The bylaw will deal with issues regarding the placement of turbines, and will define acceptable location, minimum distance between windmills and buildings, and the minimum acceptable setback from the road.

By‐Law is Being Developed as of April 2008

December 19, 2008


APPENDIX E ― ENERGY MODEL FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT

For the purposes of this study, the overall picture for large scale energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction through the most efficient use of energy in buildings has been presented for the period to 2036. However, in reality, building retrofits and new building energy saving upgrades are likely to be undertaken through a series of discrete decisions by building owners, engineers, architects and builders over an extend period of time. It can be expected that the owner of each existing building and the builder of each new building in Calgary will have to make a decision particular to their own circumstances.

At the same time, the timing of the decision can be influenced through other regulatory and incentive packages. For instance, if Calgary adopts the integrated urban energy strategy put forward, there is a likelihood that higher building regulatory measures would be applied to ensure building energy efficiency retrofits and improved building energy efficiency standards are carried out in accordance with the timetable required for the accomplishment of Calgary’s GHG reduction goal. The economic assessment undertaken is a true market evaluation and does not address full cost accounting or lifecycle analysis issues. When evaluating the impacts of various decisions, such as improvements in energy efficiency, no economic value is applied to achieving the goal of a 50 percent reduction in GHG emissions and how this can impact the overall economic performance of Calgary in terms of competitiveness, employment and improved health.

To provide a better understanding of how building operators, developers and homeowners might make decisions on energy improvements over the next 28 years, case studies were developed for average buildings or unit sizes for six typical buildings:

• Residential Low density • Residential Medium Density • Residential High Density • Commercial – Office • Commercial – Retail • Average Industrial • Average Institutional

For each building type, an economic assessment was prepared relating to the retrofit of an existing building to reduce energy consumption by 25 percent and to upgrade a new building by 50 percent above code for new Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB). In each case, electricity and gas use with and without the energy‐saving investment was calculated, along with the production of GHG emissions. Chart 1 and 2 outline the financial implications of the energy and GHG saving investments for each of the seven building types.

Residential low density can be used to explain the results:

December 19, 2008


• Residential low density involves a 160 m2 home. To retrofit an average size single detached residential home to reduce energy consumption by 25 percent will cost a homeowner on average approximately $5,760. Energy savings for this improvement are estimated to be $324, which provides for a 17.7 year backpack period to recover the investment and begin earning from energy savings. A more valid financial measure is the rate of return on investment (which allows the investor to compare this to other competing investment opportunities). In this case, the retrofit investment produces a negative rate of return; a minimum rate of return today should be at least 5% (although provincial government bond yields are under 3% at this moment).

• Alternatively, to improve a new home by 50 percent above the MNECB, will cost the home builder an extra $2,592 to implement the upgrade. Energy savings each year will be $656. This provides a new home buyer with a payback period of 4.0 years and the rate of return on investment is nearly 22 percent.

In order to assess whether the results were sensitive to energy prices, three tests were run for each case: (1) wherein energy prices rise at the same rate as the Consumer Price Index (CPI); (2) wherein energy prices rise 3 percent higher than the CPI in each year; (3) wherein energy prices rise 5 percent higher than CPI in each year. In all cases, these relative price changes in energy did not materially affect investment financial feasibility.

For instance, as outlined in Chart 1, the retrofit of existing building to reduce energy use by 25 percent provides excellent returns for commercial office, commercial retail and average industrial buildings. Returns on high density residential retrofit are also good, while returns for the average institutional are marginal. Both residential low and residential medium density retrofits offer poor returns for owners and are thus considered not viable financially.

In terms of new buildings, upgrading to the MNECB plus 50 percent provides outstanding returns for the average institutional structure and are excellent for commercial office, commercial retail, residential low density and residential high density. Returns are marginal for residential medium density and average industrial.

This analysis indicates that for cases where returns are high, the City of Calgary could draw on local programs, such as BuildGreen™ and other initiatives, to educate builders, engineers and architects as a means of implementing an energy reduction strategy. For building owners, where returns are marginal or negative (e.g., residential low and medium density retrofits), a policy of subsidies may be effective in cases where appeals to achieving environmental goals and reductions in risk (potential energy price spikes) are not sufficient incentives. In the example of residential low density retrofits, a subsidy of approximately $3,250 (55 percent of the capital cost) would be required to increase the return on investment to a minimally acceptable 5 percent. The analysis also reveals that regardless of fuel prices, adopting a 50 percent improvement above the MNECB provides excellent

December 19, 2008


returns to investors. As well, it also underscores the need for the City of Calgary to have all new buildings developed to the MNECB plus 50 percent level of efficiency, which will allow Calgary to meet the proposed community GHG target and avoid potential higher cost requirements of having to use more alternative energy sources to compensate for the development of less efficient buildings.

Relative to other Canadian market places, the challenge to retrofit homes fewer than three floors is not an uncommon market reality. To address this, incentives have been widely applied to encourage residential homeowners to invest in energy improvements to meet energy and GHG targets. For instance, in Ontario, the province has launched an extensive home energy savings program that leverages the Federal governments’ ecoENREGY retrofit program. Owners of homes across Ontario receive support to undertake an energy audit and are eligible for up to $5,000 for home energy improvements. This matches up to $5,000 available from the federal government for a total of nearly $10,000 in energy efficiency improvement financing. Similar programs are offered by municipalities, including the City of Toronto, to encourage better building efficiency, including reductions in water consumption.

Although the use of incentives have proven effective to raise awareness about the importance of energy efficiency, it is unlikely that strong financial incentives will achieve the 100 percent retrofit goal over a 28 year period. Delaying improvements, particularly for the retrofit of buildings, will likely increase the need for more expensive local energy sources, such as biomass and solar hot water. Alternatively, mandating the need, through innovative planning and financing requirements, including local improvement costs, or legislative changes to the building code are likely to aid in achieving a higher level of success in meeting Calgary’s GHG reduction goal for both existing and new buildings.

CHART 1 THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF ENERGY AND GHG SAVING INVESTMENTS FOR RETROFIT 25 PERCENT LESS ENERGY CONSUMED

Residential Low Density

Residential Medium

Residential High Density

Commercial Office

Commercial Retail

Average Industrial

Average Institutional

Unit of Measure

Building Size m2 160 240 10000 10000 1000 7500 9000retrofit cost $/m2 36.00$ 26.40$ 17.40$ 16.20$ 14.40$ 18.60$ 21.60$ GJ elec used GJ/m2/yr 0.1140 0.1140 0.1600 0.2740 0.4340 0.3540 0.1140GJ gas used GJ/m2/yr 0.3210 0.2570 0.4170 0.2890 0.4500 0.3530 0.5780Tonnes GHG produced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.0518 0.0472 0.0702 0.0899 0.1417 0.1146 0.0701

No RetrofitGJ elec used GJ/m2/yr 0.1520 0.1520 0.2130 0.3660 0.5790 0.4720 0.1520GJ gas used GJ/m2/yr 0.4280 0.3420 0.5570 0.3850 0.5990 0.4710 0.7710Tonnes GHG produced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.0690 0.0629 0.0936 0.1198 0.1889 0.1528 0.0935

Benefits of retrofitGJ elec used GJ/m2/yr 0.0380 0.0380 0.0530 0.0920 0.1450 0.1180 0.0380GJ gas used GJ/m2/yr 0.1070 0.0850 0.1400 0.0960 0.1490 0.1180 0.1930Tonnes GHG produced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.0173 0.0157 0.0234 0.0300 0.0472 0.0382 0.0234

Energy Priceselecricity $/GJ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ gas $/GJ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$

Savings Due to Retrofitelec saved $/yr 172.00$ 258.00$ 14,993.70$ 26,026.80$ 4,102.05$ 25,036.65$ 9,675.18$

gas saved $/yr 152.85$ 182.14$ 12,499.48$ 8,571.07$ 1,330.30$ 7,901.46$ 15,508.28$

total energy savings $/yr 324.85$ 440.14$ 27,493.18$ 34,597.87$ 5,432.35$ 32,938.11$ 25,183.46$ GHG saved Tonnes GHG/yr 2.7605 3.7742 233.9080 299.5177 47.2326 286.5781 210.2673

Capital Cost of Retrofit: $ 5,760.00$ 6,336.00$ 174,000.00$ 162,000.00$ 14,400.00$ 139,500.00$ 194,400.00$

Quick Payback yrs 17.7 14.4 6.3 4.7 2.7 4.2 7.7

Rate of Return - 10 years, 0% net energy inflation (vs. CPI)

% -9% -6% 9% 17% 36% 20% 5%


% -7% -4% 12% 20% 39% 22% 8%


% -5% -2% 14% 21% 41% 24% 9%

CHART 2 THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF ENERGY AND GHG SAVING INVESTMENTS FOR NEW BUILDINGS 50 PERCENT BETTER THAN MNECB

Residential Low Density

Residential Medium

Residential High Density

Commercial Office

Commercial Retail

Average Industrial

Average Institutional

Unit of MeasureBuilding Size m2 160 240 10000 10000 1000 7500 9000Added Cost $/m2 16.20$ 16.37$ 22.21$ 26.29$ 26.59$ 7.19$ 19.99$ GJ elec used GJ/m2/yr 0.2200 0.2010 0.2240 0.2630 0.4060 0.1160 0.3960GJ gas used GJ/m2/yr 0.1510 0.1450 0.1380 0.1980 0.1330 0.1590 0.1820Tonnes GHG produced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.0662 0.0611 0.0665 0.0806 0.1119 0.0407 0.1130

Code (No Upgrade)GJ elec used GJ/m2/yr 0.2570 0.2110 0.3090 0.4450 0.5700 0.1980 0.6070GJ gas used GJ/m2/yr 0.4930 0.3470 0.3710 0.4880 0.5500 0.2730 0.4390Tonnes GHG produced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.1001 0.0780 0.1045 0.1472 0.1831 0.0695 0.1846

Benefits of upgrade to 50%GJ elec saved GJ/m2/yr 0.0370 0.0100 0.0850 0.1820 0.1640 0.0820 0.2110GJ gas saved GJ/m2/yr 0.3420 0.2020 0.2330 0.2900 0.4170 0.1140 0.2570Tonnes GHG reduced Tonnes/m2/yr 0.0339 0.0169 0.0380 0.0666 0.0712 0.0288 0.0716

Energy Priceselecricity $/GJ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ 28.29$ gas $/GJ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$ 8.93$

Savings Due to Upgrade to 50%elec saved $/yr 167.48$ 67.90$ 24,046.50$ 51,487.80$ 4,639.56$ 17,398.35$ 53,722.71$

gas saved $/yr 488.55$ 432.84$ 20,802.71$ 25,891.78$ 3,723.06$ 7,633.61$ 20,650.93$

total energy savings $/yr 656.03$ 500.74$ 44,849.21$ 77,379.58$ 8,362.62$ 25,031.96$ 74,373.64$ ghg saved Tonnes/yr 5.4240 4.0560 380.0000 666.0000 71.2000 216.0000 644.4000

Capital Cost of Upgrade to 50%: 2,592.00$ 3,928.80$ 222,100.00$ 262,900.00$ 26,590.00$ 53,925.00$ 179,910.00$

Quick Payback yrs 4.0 7.8 5.0 3.4 3.2 2.2 2.4


% 22% 5% 15% 27% 29% 45% 40%


% 25% 7% 18% 29% 32% 48% 43%


% 26% 9% 20% 31% 34% 50% 45%

energy mapping study - special · energy mapping study ... calgary staff to evaluate the link...

Documents