2013...2 t E A ONME REPO 2013 3 intrOdUCtiOn 3 About the BBEEr 4 About BOMA BESt 5 Five Pillars of BOMA BESt 6 suoun i ntCo i emv omentr p in BOMA BESt buildings 7 MEtHOOLOGYd 8 kEY

BOMA BESt ENERGY AND ENviRONMENt REPORt

2013

BOMA Canada is the voice of the Canadian commercial real estate industry. A national not-for-profit association, with strong regional association in each major region in Canada, BOMA Canada is comprised of over 3,200 members, representing close to 2.1 billion square feet of commercial space in the country.

over

3,200members

BOMA BESt EnErgy And EnvirOnMEnt rEpOrt 2013

BOMA BEStwww.bomabest.com twitter: @BOMA_BESt

COntACt USBOMA Canada www.bomacanada.com

John Smiciklas, director of Energy and Environment: [email protected]

Hazel Sutton, Manager of Environmental Standards: [email protected]

BOMA nEtwOrk in CAnAdABOMA BC (includes the yukon territory): www.boma.bc.ca

BOMA Calgary (includes Southern Alberta from red deer to the Montana Border): www.boma.ca

BOMA Edmonton (includes Edmonton, the area to its north, and the northwest territories): www.bomaedmonton.org

BOMA regina (includes all of Saskatchewan): www.bomaregina.ca

BOMA Manitoba (includes nunavut): www.bomamanitoba.ca

BOMA toronto (includes all of Ontario except for the Kingston, Ottawa, and gatineau areas): www.bomatoronto.org

BOMA Ottawa (includes Ottawa, gatineau, and Kingston): www.bomaottawa.org

BOMA Quebec: www.boma-quebec.org

BOMA new Brunswick and prince Edward island: www.bomanewbrunswick.com

BOMA nova Scotia: www.bomanovascotia.com

BOMA newfoundland and Labrador: www.bomanl.com

Members include building owners, managers, developers, facilities managers, asset managers, leasing agents and brokers, investors, and service providers.

1

BOMA British Columbia

BOMA Calgary

BOMA Edmonton

BOMA Regina

BOMA Manitoba

BOMA Ottawa

BOMA Quebec

BOMA New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island

BOMA Nova Scotia

BOMA Newfoundland and Labrador

BOMA Toronto

2 BOMA BESt EnErgy And EnvirOnMEnt rEpOrt 2013

3 intrOdUCtiOn

3 About the BBEEr

4 About BOMA BESt

5 Five Pillars of BOMA BESt

6 Continuous improvement in BOMA BESt buildings

7 MEtHOdOLOGY

8 kEY FindinGS

9 kEY rECOMMEndAtiOnS

10 SPECiAL FEAtUrE: JOUrnEY tHrOUGH BOMA BESt – A CASE StUdY

PErFOrMAnCE rEPOrt: BOMA BESt BUiLdinGS

14 data Sets

18 Office

18 Overall BOMA BESt Scores and ratings

20 Energy

30 LEAdEr in new Energy technology: royal Bank Building

33 SpECiAL FEAtUrE: Existing Building Commissioning at Commerce Court

35 LEAdEr in Ongoing Commissioning: Le Windsor

38 water

41 LEAdEr in Water Conservation: 25 york Street

42 waste reduction and Site Enhancement

43 LEAdEr in Waste reduction: Scotia plaza

44 LEAdEr in reducing Site impact: Head-Smashed-in Buffalo Jump interpretive Centre

44 Emissions and Effluents

47 SpECiAL FEAtUrE: the importance of Occupational Health and Safety in Buildings

48 indoor Environment

49 Environmental Management System

50 LEAdEr in tenant Engagement: Collaboration for Energy Conservation at Bell trinity Square

52 Multi-Unit residential Building


54 Energy

57 water

58 Emissions and Effluents

58 LEAdEr in reducing Emissions and Effluents: yaletown 939

59 indoor Environment

59 LEAdEr in indoor Environment: Bayview @ Coal Harbour

60 Enclosed Shopping Centre


62 Energy

63 water

64 Light industrial


66 Open Air retail


68 COnCLUSiOn

69 FiGUrES And tABLES

70 LiSt OF ACrOnYMS

71 BiBLiOGrAPHY

tABLE OF CONtENtS

2013

3BOMA BESt EnErgy And EnvirOnMEnt rEpOrt 2013

iNtRODUCtiON

this report will showcase the performance of buildings in the commercial real estate industry that have achieved BOMA BESt certification in the 2012 calendar year. BOMA Canada has created this report as part of our ongoing commitment to encourage discussion surrounding improving existing building performance and reducing environmental impacts through BOMA BESt, Canada’s leading assessment and certification program.

the BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report will present a detailed analysis of the state of the commercial real estate industry in terms of energy and water efficiency, waste reduction and site enhancement,

the management of emissions and effluents, indoor environment, and environmental management systems (the six key areas of environmental performance and management critically evaluated by the BOMA BESt program).

in addition to this benchmarking data, the 2013 BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report will present real performance and management success stories from buildings across the country. We have also included case studies on key issues for building managers to illustrate the benefits of continuously assessing one’s performance and management practices within the context of BOMA BESt.

1 in previous years, the BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report (BBEEr) title was based on the year from which the certified building data was obtained. this year (and going forward) the BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report will be titled according to the year of publication. the 2013 BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report will feature information on buildings certified in 2012. 2011 building data is available in the 2011 report.

Over 3,800buildings, representing hundreds of millions of square feet of Canadian commercial real estate, have applied for certification and/or recertification to date.

3,049 buildings have achieved BOMA BESt certification and/or recertification across Canada.

ABOUt tHE BBEEr

Welcome to the fourth annual BOMA BESt Energy and Environment Report.1


ABOUt BOMA BEStBOMA BESt (Building Environmental Standards) is Canada’s largest environmental assessment and certification program for existing buildings. it is a unique, voluntary program designed by building owners, managers and operators in conjunction with a wide range of independent external experts to provide the commercial real estate industry with a consistent framework for assessing and improving the environmental performance and management of existing buildings of all sizes. BOMA BESt is an effective tool for monitoring and addressing building impacts on existing environmental challenges in Canada, as well as those expected from global climate change.

the BOMA BESt mission is to create a sustainable environment, one building at a time. the program supports this aim by facilitating the continuous improvement of building operation and maintenance through the use of a questionnaire, or survey-based, assessment.

BOMA BESt certification recognizes excellence in energy and environmental management and performance in commercial real estate. the program is managed by the Building Owners and Managers Association of Canada (BOMA Canada) and delivered by the eleven local BOMA Associations throughout Canada. Since the program’s inception, BOMA BESt has seen tremendous uptake by the Canadian real estate industry. As at december 31, 2012:

• Over 3,800 buildings, representing hundreds of millions of square feet of Canadian commercial real estate, have applied for certification and/or recertification to date;

• 3,049 buildings have achieved BOMA BESt certification and/or recertification across Canada.

in January 2012, BOMA BESt launched version 2 of the program. this new version contains new questions as well as revised standards which reflect ever-improving industry best practices and expectations.

iNtRODUCtiON

FIGURE 1: BOMA BESt CERTIFIED BUILDINGS (cumulative)

Year

Ru

nn

ing

To

tal N

um

ber

of

BO

MA

BE

St

Cer

tifi

ed B

uild

ing

s

20122011201020092008200720062005

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

2012201120102009

2008200720062005


FivE PiLLARS OF BOMA BESt

ASSESSMEnt

EdUCAtiOn

VEriFiCAtiOn

CErtiFiCAtiOn

iMPrOVEMEnt

1. ASSESSMEntthe online BOMA BESt assessment consists of 175 detailed questions. A summary performance report is generated, providing users with score distribution for each sub-section. Users are provided with energy performance data in a universally accepted metric (Energy Use intensity), allowing building owners, managers and facility operators to more effectively benchmark performance. Finally, the summary performance report will highlight achievements as well as a range of recommendations for improvement.

2. EdUCAtiOnBOMA BESt guides managers through a building review process, providing them with a holistic approach to understanding building operations and its associated environmental impacts, as well as how these can be improved. in doing so, BOMA BESt fosters a culture of improvement within the organization.

3. VEriFiCAtiOninformation submitted by BOMA BESt applicants is verified through a third-party audit of energy and water utility data, a review of documented policies and procedures and operations manuals, as well as a walk-through of the building, including the plant room and a typical occupant space.

4. CErtiFiCAtiOnFour levels of certification distinguish higher performing buildings based on their energy and environmental performance.

BOMA BESt Level 1: the building has met all BOMA BESt practices (includes performing an energy audit and a water audit, continually monitoring resource consumption and having a preventative maintenance program).

BOMA BESt Level 2: the building has met all BOMA BESt practices And has achieved a score of 70 – 79% on the BOMA BESt assessment. the building is moving towards better energy and environmental performance through improved management practices.

BOMA BESt Level 3: the building has met all BOMA BESt practices And has achieved a score of 80 – 89% on the BOMA BESt assessment. the building is moving towards excellence in energy and environmental performance through excellent management practices.

BOMA BESt Level 4: the highest level of certification. the building has met all BOMA BESt practices And has achieved a score of over 90% on the BOMA BESt assessment. these buildings are high performers with low energy consumption, excellent management, and often combine new technologies and industry leadership.

5. iMPrOVEMEntBOMA BESt certified buildings achieve better energy and water use intensities than the national average. the program helps building owners, managers and facility operators establish a building baseline performance, implement initiatives over time, and achieve an improved score upon recertification.


BOMA BESt has helped thousands of building owners and managers realize greater energy and water efficiencies in their buildings, thereby improving the sustainability of Canada’s built environment, and the quality of life for building occupants.

Moreover, BOMA BESt contributes to energy and environmental improvement thanks to its emphasis on continuous improvement. As the buildings certified in the early years of the program are now being recertified – many for the second time – there is a marked improvement in the overall scores,

particularly in buildings that had low initial scores (Figure 2). in 2012, 115 buildings achieved recertification. From this sample, scores decreased for 25 buildings, 21 buildings experienced no score change at all, and 69 buildings scored better upon recertification than at original certification. this improvement is particularly significant since many buildings were recertified to the new and more stringent requirements of version 2.

Approximately 30% of buildings (67 buildings) have successfully reduced their energy consumption upon recertification in 2012. For these buildings, energy use intensity was

reduced on average from 34.92 ekWh/ft2/yr at initial certification to 31.68 ekWh/ft2/yr after recertification – a 9% reduction in energy consumption. this indicates a clear improvement in the management and implementation of initiatives surrounding energy conservation and demand reduction. One hundred and seven buildings (50%) maintained similar consumption levels to original certifications while 20% of buildings experienced higher levels of consumption.

CONtiNUOUS iMPROvEMENt iN BOMA BESt BUiLDiNGS

FIGURE 2: BOMA BESt SCORES – CERTIFICATION VS. RECERTIFICATION

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

RecertificationInitial Certification

Sco

re (

%)

Number of Buildings

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101 106 111

FIGURE 3: BOMA BESt EUI – CERTIFICATION VS. RECERTIFICATION

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101 106

RecertificationsInitial Certification

ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

Number of Buildings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


BBEEr 2013 dAtA SEt

MEtHODOLOGY

the 2013 BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report (BBEEr) analysis is based on a sample which includes aggregated data from 455 buildings certified to BOMA BESt Levels 2, 3, and 4. All buildings achieved certification between January 1 and december 31, 2012. Buildings certified to Level 1 are not included in this analysis since this certification level does not assess performance.

the following asset classes have been analyzed for this report:

• Office;

• Multi-Unit residential Building (MUrB);

• Enclosed Shopping Centre;

• Light industrial;

• Open Air retail.

this sample represents approximately 98.1 million square feet of Canadian commercial real estate.

2445

18

31

123

97

545

BOMA British Columbia

BOMA Regina

BOMA Manitoba

BOMA Ottawa

BOMA New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island

BOMA Nova Scotia

BOMA Newfoundlandand Labrador

BOMA Toronto

BOMA Quebec

BOMA Edmonton

1

948

BOMA Calgary


• Buildings achieved an overall score in the mid- to high seventies range (Level 2), demonstrating that there is still room for performance improvement amongst Canadian existing buildings.

• Average energy use intensity for BOMA BESt certified office buildings is 30.76 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 1.19 f gJ/m2/yr) with a median of 27.84 ekWh/ft2/yr – a 16% improvement on the nrCan national average.

• Buildings that achieved energy reductions at recertification saw their energy use intensity drop from 34.92 ekWh/ft2/yr at initial certification to 31.68 ekWh/ft2/yr after recertification – a 9% reduction in energy consumption.

• Seventy-five percent (75%) of BOMA BESt certified office buildings have a better score than the BOMA BESt average of 30.76 ekWh/ft2/yr.

• Forty-six percent (46%) of BOMA BESt certified office buildings in the sample have energy use intensities between 23 and 33 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 0.89 – 1.27 gJ/m2/yr).

• Energy efficiency features are not the only indicators of good energy performance; effective management practices must also be present.

• Older, lower performing buildings are being brought up to similar performance levels than their more modern counterparts thanks to building operator and manager emphasis on building re-commissioning and major retrofits.

• BOMA BESt buildings have avoided emitting 160,240 Mt of CO2. this represents the equivalent of removing 33,383 cars from the road for one year, or the capacity of 82,090 square city blocks of pine forest to store CO2 for one year.

• Average water consumption intensity for BOMA BESt certified office buildings is 0.6 m3/m2 – a 70% improvement on the national average of 2.03 m3/m2.

• Forty five percent (45%) of buildings divert between 30 – 59% of their waste from landfill while a smaller percentage diverts between 60 – 90%.

• Emissions and effluent scores remain high across the country which suggests that managers of BOMA BESt certified buildings have a strong commitment to implementing effective management practices for hazardous materials and products.

• BOMA BESt certified buildings achieved consistently high scores (high 90s) on the Environmental Management System section: most buildings have documented environmental policies and tenant communications strategies.

• BOMA BESt certified buildings across the country achieve consistently high scores (mid 80s) for indoor environment management and practices.

• Buildings achieved an overall score in the mid- to high seventies range (Level 2), demonstrating that there is still room for performance improvement amongst Canadian existing buildings.

KEY FiNDiNGS

Good managementpractices and energy efficient technologies are necessary for achieving high performance in buildings.

BOMA BEStbuildings have avoided emitting 160,240 Mt of CO2 – the equivalent of removing 33,383 cars from the road for one year.

Buildings achieved a 9%

reduction of energy consumption at recertification.

Metropolitan towers, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2011)


the 2013 BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report (BBEEr) has also identified the following areas of improvement for Canada’s existing building stock:

• Energy: despite growing evidence that sub-metering is extremely helpful for identifying energy saving opportunities as well as facilitating ongoing commissioning practices, this technology is still not commonly found in buildings. Sub-meters are especially critical for building managers seeking to understand the energy performance of individual buildings within an office complex or to investigate the differences in individual tenant consumption patterns.

• Transportation: Building owners and managers still have many opportunities available to them for reducing dependency on single-occupant vehicles and their associated carbon emissions. practices that make alternative forms of transportation attractive and accessible to building occupants include installing shelter over bicycle racks, providing changing facilities for cyclists, and creating a communication strategy and plan for car-pooling.

• Water: Since large buildings typically play host to a wide range of high-impact water features such as cooling towers and more extensive food services, there are great opportunities for water savings through targeted demand reduction management practices.

• Waste: Average diversion rates have dropped compared to the 2011 certified building sample despite high scores in waste management practices. Since waste management strategies are already in place, building managers have an opportunity to increase tenant engagement in waste diversion objectives by setting high targets and increasing the availability of composting.

• Site: there is an opportunity for more buildings to engage in improving the ecological health of the building’ site, such as through site remediation with native species and removal of water-intensive landscape features.

• Emissions and Effluents: Many buildings still have equipment that contains ozone-depleting substances and global warming refrigerants although these are being phased out.

• Indoor Environment: Buildings within the sample did not have many of the following features, all linked with improved indoor environment for building occupants: personal controls over ventilation and lighting; implementing a schedule for cleaning lamps and group re-lamping.

• Environmental Management System: More buildings would benefit from undertaking tenant satisfaction surveys and developing site maps that identify the location of environmentally significant features (such as hazardous waste), enabling more effective response in the event of an emergency.

KEY RECOMMENDAtiONS

Blue Cross Centre, Moncton, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

Laurier House, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)


Scotia Centre, St. John’s, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

the Scotia Centre (East port properties) in St. John’s, newfoundland – a frequent winner of the BOMA Earth Award and Certificate of recognition – has been committed to environmental performance since the inception of the BOMA BESt program in 2005.the building, the first non-government building in newfoundland and Labrador to achieve BOMA BESt certification, has now achieved certification three times: go green plus (2007), BOMA BESt Level 2 (2008), and BOMA BESt Level 3 (2012). Over the years, operational costs have decreased and tenant and staff engagement has increased.

Using the Scotia Centre as a case study, this feature will detail how the BOMA BESt program can help building owners and managers reach their energy and environmental objectives.

JOURNEY tHROUGH BOMA BESt – A CASE StUDY

SPECiAL FEAtURE


the Scotia Centre performance and management awards

i. tHE BOMA BESt CErtiFiCAtiOn PrOCESS CAn inFOrM YOUr EnVirOnMEntAL StrAtEGY:

When it was determined that BOMA BESt could provide the context for measuring environmental performance, the Scotia Centre management team addressed the following five questions before moving forward:

1. Scoping: What is required by the BOMA BESt Program?

2. Benchmarking: What is the building already doing well?

3. Low hanging fruit – management: What programs and policies can be immediately put into place to achieve the best performance possible (for example, improving recycling beyond municipal regulations)?

4. Low hanging fruit – performance: What initiatives will have an immediate impact on reducing operating costs? identifying such initiatives provided the building management team with a great place to start.

5. Capital investments: What initiatives need to be included in the five-year capital plan? Once the “easy wins” are addressed, major renovations/replacements need to be identified and included in the owner’s capital plan. these investments, amortized over a period of time, will lead to reduced operating costs in the long run.

“ thanks to this process we’ve identified that investing in our equipment will not only help to increase our score but at the end of the day will improve our operational efficiencies and reduce our costs.” – Kim Saunders, Property Manager, East Port Properties


Go Green (2007)

BOMA BESt Level 2 (2008) (formerly Go Green Plus)

BOMA BESt Level 3 (2012)

Energy Achieved BESt practices

• First building audit;

• re-scheduled equipment start times;

• reduced hot water boiler temperature;

• installed t8s and electronic ballasts;

• replaced exit lights with LEds;

• installed lighting sensors in garage;

• Upgraded lighting controller.

Score: 57%

• replaced chiller (30% more efficient);

• implemented annual re-lamping program.

Energy Use Intensity: 29.08 kWh/ft2/year

Score: 70%

• Energy audit update;

• installed lighting sensors in washrooms;

• installed variable speed drives;

• implemented daytime cleaning.

Energy Use Intensity: 27.86 kWh/ft2/yearEstimated 2012 Savings: $26,018

Water Achieved BESt practices

• installed hands free faucets;

• installed low-flow toilets;

• installed auto flush urinals.

Score: 47%

• detected faulty water city metre thanks to water audit;

• Continued investigation towards eliminating once-through water cooled units.

Score: 50%

• implemented use-billing for excessive water use.

• Budgeted for replacement of water meter (completed in early 2013)

Estimated water savings: 1,700,000 L

Waste Reduction & Site

Achieved BESt practices

• Created tenant manual and design criteria manual for tenants and contractors.

Score: 81%

• Management and tenant-led initiatives are featured in a new tenant informational tool kit.

Score: 76%

• Expanded recycling program to accept batteries, fluorescent lamps, and electronic waste.

Emissions and Effluents


• installed MErv 8 HvAC filters.

Score: 89%

• Eliminated r11 in main tower by installing a new chiller;

• Added spill kits and pallets in chemically sensitive areas.

Score: 93%

• Eliminated r22 in tower two by installing new HvAC equipment.

Indoor Environ-ment


• required contractors and tenants to use low vOC emitting products;

• implemented re-lamping and fixture cleaning system plan.

Score: 96%

• implemented a re-lamping and fixture cleaning system plan.

Score: 97%

• reduced CO2 levels year over year by balancing HvAC requirements;

• implemented a mould management plan.

EMS Achieved BESt practices Score: 100% Score: 100%

ii. BOMA BESt rECErtiFiCAtiOn EnCOUrAGES COntinUOUS iMPrOVEMEnt

next Steps to achieve Level 4 in 2015: Sub-metering all tenants for energy consumption; replacing the pneumatic control system to ddC (digital) for more efficient control of floor temperatures; conducting a building envelope study leading to building envelope upgrades; removal of once-through water cooling units; and finally re-commissioning and optimization of all systems.

“ it is a core commitment of our organization to constantly strive for the best possible indoor environment within our buildings. the achievements of Scotia Centre are great example of these efforts.” – John Lindsay, President, East Port Properties


2. Increasing staff engagement and awareness of environmental impacts

• For a successful program, staff must also be on-board, understanding that their actions directly impact energy use and the environment.

• Monthly staff meetings to review energy use allow the team to understand the building’s energy consumption patterns, in turn providing them with the tools to manage consumption.

• indoor air quality has been drastically improved thanks to the methodology put in place for the BOMA BESt program. the team is now able to pinpoint problem areas and adjust the mechanical equipment accordingly.

3. Increasing familiarity and comfort with building operations

• Over time the Scotia Centre management team has become significantly more familiar with its own processes. this means it is easier to identify where opportunities for improvement may lie.

• BOMA BESt serves as a benchmarking tool, providing the Scotia Centre with a clear understanding of how the building is performing at a particular point in time. performance goals are now being regularly set.

• the helpful resources and recommendations provided in the BOMA BESt report assist in the decision making process for investment in improvements.

• Building managers can take ownership of the process; it has become a sustainability journey.

iii. tHE BOMA BESt PrOGrAM – A PLAtFOrM tHrOUGH wHiCH tO EnGAGE tEnAntS And StAFF

According to Kim Saunders, property Manager at the Scotia Centre, there are three key benefits to participating in the BOMA BESt program:

1. Increasing tenant engagement and awareness of environmental impacts

• the building’s success in the program is directly related to the increase in tenant awareness and participation in the program over the past 5 years. tenants now go beyond the building’s standard recycling plan and play a role in the greater community thanks to a successful re-use program for office equipment and materials.

• Collecting tenant feedback is critical to keeping tenants engaged and committed. “they are a wonderful resource and contribute many ideas to improving the building. they want to be part of the process too!”

* tenant shredding figures not available prior to May 2007

Ton

s

Waste Sent to Landfill Total Recycled Total Garbage Created Annually

42%

71% 73% 67%69%

72%

0.00

50.00

100.00

200.00

250.00

*2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

150.00

SCOTIA CENTRE WASTE REDUCTION

kWh

’s

Annual Consumption

14,000

14,500

15,500

16,500

17,500

15,000

16,000

17,000

SCOTIA CENTRE ENERGY DEMAND REDUCTION

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Baseline kWh


PERFORMANCE REPORt: BOMA BESt Buildings

DAtA SEtS

Office buildings dominate this data set, comprising 80% (367) of the buildings benchmarked, the next being multi-unit residential buildings (37), enclosed shopping centres (22), light industrial (19) and finally open-air retail (10) (see Figure 4).

FIGURE 4: BOMA BESt CERTIFIED BUILDINGS, BY TYPE (2012)

Office

MURB

Enclosed Retail

Light Industrial

Open Air Retail

367,81%

37,8%

22,5%

19,4%

10,2%

FIGURE 5: CERTIFIED BUILDINGS, BY REGION

British Columbia

Alberta

Saskatchewan

Manitoba

Ontario

Quebec

Atlantic

Northwest Territories

24, 5%

92, 20%

19, 4%

9, 2%

151, 33%

97, 22%

60, 13%

3, 1%

2 research drive, regina, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2012)


this is the first year that data has been compared by Canadian climate zone2. All cities in Canada are located in zones A, B, C, and d, and range from the warmer humid climate in southern British Columbia (zone A), to subarctic (zone d). Most major Canadian cities are located in zone B.

FiGUrE 6: CAnAdiAn CLiMAtE ZOnES

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone C

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

FIGURE 7: CERTIFIED BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

270, 59%

24, 5%

158, 35%

3, 1%

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone C

Climate Zone D

2 nrCan. Climate Zones for ENERGY STAR qualified Windows, Doors and Skylights. 2011. retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/equipment/windows-doors/1371


FIGURE 9: CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY AGE

Before 1960

1960 – 1989

1990 and Newer

224, 61%

85, 23%

58, 16%

OFFiCEthree hundred and sixty seven (367) office buildings are included in the sample.

FIGURE 8: CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY SIZE

Under 100,000 ft²

100,000 – 250,000 ft²

250,000 – 500,000 ft²

Over 500,000 ft²

175,48%96,

26%

52,14%

44, 12%

FIGURE 10: DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY AGE AND SIZE

Year Constructed

Bu

idlg

in S

ize

(ft²

)

1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050

0.00

500,000.00

1,000,000.00

1,500,000.00

2,000,000.00

2,500,000.00


FIGURE 13: CERTIFIED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, BY SIZE

Under 100,000 ft²

Over 100,000 ft²

8, 42%

11, 58%

FIGURE 11: CERTIFIED MURBS, BY SIZE

Under 50,000 ft²

51,000 – 100,000 ft²

100,000 – 250,000 ft²

Over 250,000 ft²

6, 16%

25, 68%

3, 8%

3, 8%

FIGURE 12: CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES, BY SIZE

Under 250,000 ft²

250,000 – 750,000 ft²

750,000 – 1,000,000 ft²

Over 1,000,000 ft²

9, 41%

3, 13%

7, 32%

3, 14%

FIGURE 14: CERTIFIED OPEN AIR RETAIL, BY SIZE

Under 250,000 ft²

250,000 – 750,000 ft²

8, 80%

2, 20%

MULti-Unit rESidEntiAL BUiLdinGthirty-seven (37) MUrBs are included in the sample.

LiGHt indUStriAL nineteen (19) Light industrial buildings are included in the sample.

EnCLOSEd SHOPPinG CEntrE twenty-two (22) Enclosed Shopping Centres are included in the sample.

OPEn Air rEtAiL (PLAZAS, POwEr CEntErS) ten (10) Open Air retail buildings are included in the sample.


OVErALL BOMA BESt SCOrES And rAtinGSOffices represent the largest proportion of buildings in this sample (81%) and as such their performance will be more thoroughly reviewed then other asset types.

the average BOMA BESt score achieved by office buildings has increased slightly over the years:

• 77.8%in2010;

• 78.1%in2011;

• 78.2%in2012.

PEFORMANCE REPORt

OFFiCE

FIGURE 15: OVERALL BOMA BESt SCORES FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)

NorthwestTerritories

Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0

74.7

78.4

Average: 78.2

80.5

77.3

75.6

80.4

77.0

76.3

Jamieson place, Calgary, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2011)


As one might expect, buildings in climate zone d face the greatest energy and environmental challenges with fairly extreme weather conditions. nevertheless, the score variation across regions remains small.

Since 2006, when performance scores were introduced, overall scores have been improving incrementally. However, Figure 17 shows that the percentage of buildings achieving BOMA BESt Level 4 certification is still relatively small. there is definitely room for improvement in energy and environmental performance and management across this asset type.

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

72.0 73.0 74.0 75.0 76.0 77.0 78.0 79.0

Score (%)

FIGURE 16: OVERALL BOMA BESt SCORES FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CANADIAN CLIMATE ZONE

74.7

77.9

78.5

78.3

Average: 78.2

Compared to the 2011 BBEEr, a larger proportion of public sector buildings are part of the data set this year, with participation numbers being almost equal. the public sector represents a larger number of buildings certified to Level 4 (Figure 18).

there are many factors that may help explain this difference between private and public sector performance. the primary driver may be regulation: increasingly, federal and provincial regulations have been put in place to achieve overarching environmental objectives, resulting in mandated green building certification for public buildings that fit a specific criterion3,4. Additionally, some provinces are emphasizing the need for publically accessible energy conservation targets and plans in public sector buildings5. Altogether, these are leading to an increase in BOMA BESt certified buildings amongst federal and provincially-owned buildings.

Although regulation mandating green building standards may be a big driver for pursuing BOMA BESt certification, departments within the government of Canada are recognizing the critical importance of developing an ongoing building management plan to ensure that targets are being met and new opportunities for cost-savings are identified. As stated in the Standing Committee on government Operations and Estimates of the 1st session of the 41st parliament on April 18, 2013, BOMA BESt has been recognized by public Works and government Services of Canada as a reliable tool for benchmarking performance. it provides the department with a “yardstick to measure ongoing maintenance” and opportunities for retrofits and re-commissioning6.

Private Sector

Public Sector

FIGURE 18: NUMBER OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY LEVEL AND SECTOR

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Number of Buildings

8

79

102

10

56

86

Level 2 Level 4Level 3

3 Environment Canada. Planning for a Sustainable Future: A Federal Sustainable Development Strategy for Canada. October 2010 (Section 8.2). retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/dd-sd/default.asp?lang=En&n=d39CB7AC-1#ftn4

4 Société immobilière du Québec. Certification BOMA BESt. retrieved from https://guideduclient.siq.gouv.qc.ca/rubrique.aspx?rubrique=725 Service Ontario. Ontario Regulation 397/11 (under the green Energy Act, 2009). August 2011.

retrieved from http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2011/elaws_src_regs_r11397_e.htm6 parliament of Canada. 41st parliament, 1st Session: Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. April, 2013.

retrieved from http://www.parl.gc.ca/Housepublications/publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&parl=41&Ses=1&docid=6084985&File=0

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

FIGURE 17: DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY LEVEL AND YEAR

63

65

55

57

59

56

55

35

34

45

38

40

40

40

2

1

0

5

1

4

5

Level 4Level 3Level 2

Score (%)


the energy component of the BOMA BESt assessment is a measure of a building’s energy consumption, its energy efficiency features, and the energy management practices that have been put in place. Equipment maintenance and commissioning programs are assessed to ensure there is an opportunity for building operators and managers to continuously improve the energy performance of the building. Building occupant transportation habits are also considered in the energy section. in doing so, BOMA BESt recognizes the role building management can have on encouraging travel habits that reduce environmental impacts – a daily journey totaling as little as 8 km by car can, over one year, emit as much CO2 as that emitted to provide heat, light and power for one person in an office. the transportation section addresses items such as proximity to public transport and availability of cycling facilities.

Energy is an important environmental parameter; energy use relates directly to climate change as well as to a variety of air emissions (hydrocarbons, CO2, airborne particles, as well as sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides which contribute to acid rain). By reducing energy consumption, managers and operators can reduce a building’s environmental impact while also reducing operating costs.

Building performance can be influenced by a number of factors:

1. Age of the building;

2. Size of the building;

3. Efficiency features of the buildings;

4. Management practices including operations, monitoring and on-going commissioning; and

5. Occupant engagement.

“ (…) we’ve looked at the two methods of certification and it’s our view that BOMA BESt works best for our existing inventory and LEED is best for new construction.” – Mr. John McBain, Assistant Deputy Minister, Real Property Branch,

Department of Public Works and Government Services6

By reducing energy consumption, managers and operators can reduce a building’s environmental impact while also reducing operating costs.

Lethbridge Courthouse, Lethbridge, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2013)

6 parliament of Canada. 41st parliament, 1st Session: Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. April, 2013. retrieved from http://www.parl.gc.ca/Housepublications/publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&parl=41&Ses=1&docid=6084985&File=0


a) Energy ConsumptionAnnual energy consumption is given for each building in equivalent kilowatt-hours per square foot per year (ekWh/ft2/yr) and is calculated based on the utility bill information entered into the BOMA BESt assessment.

Since some regions have more than one climate zone, it is not surprising that the regions show minimal variation – i.e. within a 10% range (Figure 19).

Figure 20 reveals very similar energy scores in the majority of climate zones. Only climate zone d (northwest territories) shows a notably lower score (60%). this is to be expected as climate zone d experiences the most heating degree days (Hdd) as well as extreme weather and limited daylight conditions for much of the year. rising energy costs will provide building owners and managers in all regions with a greater incentive for addressing energy conservation, especially in the northwest territories where energy costs are already elevated.

the average energy use intensity (EUi)7 of certified office buildings in 2012 is only slightly lower than those certified between 2008 and 2011, highlighting a significant opportunity for improvement in energy conservation across Canada s existing building stock.

7 Energy Use intensity (EUi) is a unit of measurement that describes a building’s energy use. EUi represents the energy consumed by a building relative to its size.

FIGURE 19: AVERAGE ENERGY SCORE FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

54.0 56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0

60.0

64.8

Average: 65.7

68.6

63.4

63.6

66.7

64.8

64.2

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0

Score (%)

FIGURE 20: AVERAGE ENERGY SCORE FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

60.0

65.5

65.3

66.4

Average: 65.7

Rising energy costs will provide building owners and managers in all regions with a greater incentive for addressing energy conservation

29.5 30.0 30.5 31.0 31.5 32.0 32.5 33.0

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

FIGURE 21: AVERAGE ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY YEAR

30.76

30.80

31.85

31.52

32.77

ekWh/ft²/yr


Although BOMA BESt version 2 has the ability to exclude the energy loads from data centres from the consumption total, many buildings in this sample entered the program prior to its release. the 2014 BBEEr will almost exclusively feature buildings from version 2 and should therefore yield more accurate results.

By ordering all the BOMA BESt certified offices according to their energy use intensity the following benchmarks are obtained:

• 1st Quartile: 7.43 – 22.26 ekWh/ft2/yr (0.29 – 0.86 gJ/m2/yr)

• 2nd Quartile: 22.48 – 28.05 ekWh/ft2/yr (0.87 – 1.08 gJ/m2/yr)

• 3rd Quartile: 28.29 – 36.73 ekWh/ft2/yr (1.09 – 1.41 gJ/m2/yr)

• 4th Quartile: 36.76 – 85.3 ekWh/ft2/yr (1.42 – 3.3 gJ/m2/yr)

the majority of BOMA BESt buildings have a better EUi than the national average8 of 36.65 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 1.42 gJ/m2/yr), as shown in Figure 229.

8 nrCan.Commercial and Institutional Consumption of Energy Survey, Summary Report. 2005. retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/statistics/cices06/chapter1.cfm?attr=0 9 BOMA BESt considers consistency to be critical for effective benchmarking. Since the first 2009 BBEEr, BOMA Canada has been using nrCan’s Commercial and institutional Consumption

of Energy Survey (CiCES, 2005) database for its national benchmark comparisons. Since that time, other comparative databases and benchmarks have emerged on the market with revised methodologies, including various aspects of data normalisation (e.g. rEALpac Energy Benchmarking Survey or nrCan’s Survey of Commercial and institutional Energy Use, 2009). in order to reduce confusion regarding the BOMA BESt benchmarking methodology, BOMA BESt will continue to benchmark its properties based on nrCan’s CiCES (2005). this methodology will be reconsidered once nrCan’s portfolio Manager has been released in Canada.

High performingoffice buildings in the 2012 BOMA BESt sample consume between 7.43 and 22.26 ekWh/ft2/yr

Number of Buildings

FIGURE 22: EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS VS. NATIONAL AVERAGE

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340

ekW

h/ft

²/yr

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Average EUI of office buildings in NRCan sample = 36.65 ekWh/ft²/yr

Average EUI of BOMA BESt certified Office Buildings = 30.76 ekWh/ft²/yr

30.76 ekWh/ft²/yr

36.65 ekWh/ft²/yr

Average: 30.76

FIGURE 23: EUI DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ekWh/ft²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75

Median: 27.84


the BOMA BESt certification Levels provide a meaningful representation of annual energy use intensity.

there is a clear correlation between energy consumption and BOMA BESt Certification Level.

Private Sector

Public Sector

FIGURE 24: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY LEVEL AND SECTOR

Level 4 Level 3 Level 2

ekWh/ft²/yr

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Average: 30.76

19.5

36.4

36.8

19.0

28.3

33.7

Office buildings across each climate zone (Figure 25) have annual EUis below the national average of 36.65 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 1.42 gJ/m2/yr).

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0

Score (%)

FIGURE 25: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

60.0

65.5

65.3

66.4

Average: 65.7

When observed at a more granular level, however (Figure 26), it is possible to see that EUis vary significantly across each region.

Fuel and electricity intensities show the expected regional variations.

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0

FIGURE 26: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

ekWh/ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

Public Sector Private Sector

36.2

35.8

19.9

19.9

Average: 30.76

29.8

34.6

32.5

31.8

32.4

28.5

44.7

34.6

34.1

32.3

29.2


nAtUrAL GASAs Figure 27 demonstrates, the highest level of fuel use is found in climate zone C, which is due to the number of heating degree days (Hdd). ranges for Hdd per zone are as follows:

• Zone A: ≤ 3500 Heating degree days (Hdds)

• Zone B: > 3500 to ≤ 5500 Heating degree days (Hdds)

• Zone C: > 5500 to ≤ 8000 Heating degree days (Hdds)

• Zone d: > 8000 Heating degree days (Hdds)

As expected, data from buildings in climate zones A, B and C demonstrate that as climate zones increase so does fuel consumption10.

10 no data for fuel consumption was available for buildings in climate zone d or the northwest territories region. in the nWt, there are 3 main energy sources used to generate electricity: natural gas, diesel fuel and hydro resources. Heating oil is the most common because of its reliability and, until recently, its price.

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

0.0 500.0 1,000.0 1,500.0 2,000.0 2,500.0 3,000.0

m³/1,000 ft²/yr

FIGURE 27: AVERAGE NATURAL GAS USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

NO DATA

2,542.5

1,141.1

751.5

Average: 940.41

0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1,000.0 1,200.0 1,400.0 1,600.0 1,800.0

FIGURE 28: AVERAGE NATURAL GAS USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

m³/1000 ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

1,285.8

615.8

1,050.2

1,292.4

795.6

1,063.5

1,358.8

650.7

1,557.8

1,665.6

398.3

423.6

67.2

Public SectorPrivate Sector

Average: 940.41

L.F Kristjanson Biotechnology Complex, Saskatoon, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2012)


ELECtriCitYFigures 29 and 30 show – to some extent – the expected regional variations. Buildings in climate zone A are expected to use the most electricity since they experience the highest amount of cooling degree days (Cdd) while buildings in climate zone d should consume the least since they have the lowest amount of Cdds.

However, electricity in British Columbia, Manitoba and Quebec is predominantly generated through hydroelectricity which is less expensive than other forms of electricity production. Many of the buildings in climate zone B are located in Quebec, a region with the second highest energy use intensity in the sample. Unfortunately, low energy prices do not encourage conservation. Many buildings in climate zone C are also found in Quebec, as well as across central Canada.

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

kWh/ft²/yr

FIGURE 30: AVERAGE ELECTRICITY USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

18.3

14.9

22.7

19.4

Average: 18.44

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

FIGURE 29: AVERAGE ELECTRICITY USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

kWh/ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

14.97

10.0

16.89

11.03

26.72

21.0

22.98

18.4

18.38

27.1

13.25

17.86

16.7

21.6

19.68


Average: 18.44


the following correlations are revealed between energy use intensity and building age in Figure 31:

• Overall, newer buildings have better energy performances than older buildings; improved design principles could be one potential explanation for this;

• the private sector, however, is showing slightly better energy performance in its older buildings;

• the opposite trend is true for buildings from the public sector where newer buildings show lower energy use intensity levels;

• For buildings certified in 2011, both trends were reversed – with private sector “new” buildings and public sector “old” buildings having the best performance11.

Buildings built prior to 1960 have the lowest levels of energy consumption; although their building envelopes and mechanical systems may be underperforming, their lower associated plug loads, as compared to new buildings, may contribute to this result.

results may also be indicative of a widespread desire (public sector in 2011, private sector in 2012) to address the performance of older buildings by engaging in re-commissioning and major retrofits. this is a good trend for the Canadian building stock as older buildings are being brought up to the performance levels of their more modern counterparts.

A relationship between building size and energy use intensity is visible in Figure 32. Lower (better) energy intensities are consistently found in buildings under 100,000 ft2. Since small and mid-sized buildings have less complex mechanical systems, they may benefit significantly from simple energy efficiency upgrades, such as a lighting retrofit.

On the other hand, medium-to-large buildings, with more complex systems, require a wider range of integrated, and sometimes capital- intensive, solutions to achieve the same levels of reduction. very large buildings that have successfully targeted energy conservation objectives do so through a combination of sophisticated energy efficiency retrofits, integrated management systems, and investments in highly trained and qualified operational staff.

11 BOMA Canada. BOMA BESt Energy and Environmental Report (p.60). 2011. retrieved from http://www.bomabest.com/wp-content/uploads/BBEEr-2011-FinAL.pdf

Pre 1960

1960 – 1989

Post – 1990

FIGURE 31: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY AGE AND SECTOR

26.0 27.0 28.0 29.0 30.0 31.0 32.0 33.0

Overall Private Sector Public Sector

ekWh/ft²/yr

30.19

32.23

28.16

30.69

31.83

29.56

31.24

31.48

30.99

Over 500,000

250,000 – 500,000

100,000 – 250,000

Under 100,000

FIGURE 32: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY SIZE AND SECTOR

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0

ekWh/ft²/yr

Bu

ildin

g S

ize

(ft²

)

35.63

30.34

40.93

31.83

33.76

29.90

30.32

32.67

27.97

30.41

31.64

29.18

Overall Private Sector Public SectorBuildings of all ages benefit from engaging in re-commissioning and major retrofits.


12 von neida, B. & Hicks, t. (U.S. Environmental protection Agency). Building Performance Defined: the EnergyStar National Energy Performance Rating System (p.11). retrieved from http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/tools_resources/aesp.pdf

b. Energy Efficiency FeaturesAlthough it might be expected that there would be a positive correlation between the presence of energy efficiency features (EEF) and energy performance, this sample reveals that this is not necessarily the case (Figure 33).

indeed, such a finding supports an EpA study which challenged the “misconception that building efficiency can be defined by the presence of efficient equipment”12. While energy-efficient equipment can significantly contribute to improved building performance,

this is a double-edged sword; energy efficient equipment that is not being properly operated or commissioned can be a primary source of energy inefficiency.

When separating the buildings into groups based on age and size, there is a visible relationship between energy use intensity and building characteristics.

in Figures 34, 35 and 36, it is clear that implementing efficient energy features makes a difference in newer buildings but less so in buildings constructed before 1960.

very large buildings that have successfully targeted energy conservation objectives do so through a combination of sophisticated energy efficiency retrofits, integrated management systems, and investments in highly trained and qualified operational staff.

FIGURE 35: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (1960 and 1989)

Energy Efficient Features Score (%)

ekW

h/ft

²/yr

0 20 40 60 80 1000

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 33: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

0 20 40 60 80 1000

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 36: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (1990 to present)


ekW

h/ft

²/yr

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 34: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (before 1960)


ekW

h/ft

²/yr

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

20

40

60

80

100


Mid-size buildings (100,000 – 500,000 ft2) are better correlated to lower EUi and Energy Efficient Features score than smaller or larger buildings (Figures 37, 38, 39 and 40).

Several energy efficiency features are being implemented by the majority of buildings in the sample (table 1). these include lighting retrofits, temperature setback control, shading, and insulation.

As expected, buildings with a higher certification level typically have the most energy efficiency features. in the majority of cases, newer buildings also have more energy efficiency features installed throughout the building.

While energy-efficientequipment can significantly contribute to improved building performance, this is a double-edged sword; energy efficient equipment that is not being properly operated or commissioned can be a primary source of energy inefficiency.

FIGURE 37: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (under 100,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

0 20 40 60 80 1000

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 39: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (250,000 ft² – 500,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

0 20 40 60 80 1000

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 38: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (100,000 ft² – 250,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

0 20 40 60 80 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 40: EEF SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (above 500,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

0 20 40 60 80 1000

20

40

60

80

100


table 1: EEF of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

ENERGY EFFICIENCY FEATURES BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE

Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Before 1960 1960 – 1989 1990 to present

Compact fluorescent lamps 94% 95% 100% 96% 93% 96%

t8 or t5 lamps 88% 97% 100% 76% 93% 100%

LEd exit signs 79% 94% 100% 78% 86% 92%

Automated lighting controls 71% 94% 100% 75% 79% 92%

High efficiency boilers 35% 52% 100% 58% 41% 42%

Economizers on boilers 92% 97% 100% 93% 95% 94%

vent dampers 38% 60% 100% 35% 51% 53%

temperature setback controls 94% 99% 100% 95% 96% 99%

Full Building Automation System (BAS) 69% 83% 100% 58% 76% 91%

High efficiency hot water heaters 46% 64% 94% 62% 54% 61%

Hot water saving fixtures 75% 88% 100% 78% 82% 83%

Water temperature between 50 – 55˚C 87% 92% 100% 87% 88% 93%

High efficiency chillers 39% 40% 64% 37% 38% 37%

variable speed drives 69% 77% 94% 72% 71% 84%

Heat recovery 31% 46% 67% 57% 34% 43%

green electricity purchasing 19% 12% 17% 7% 19% 16%

Energy efficient windows 71% 92% 100% 73% 77% 95%

Shading or reflective film to reduce cooling 93% 98% 100% 87% 97% 99%

Air seal – top of building 74% 89% 100% 75% 78% 96%

Air seal – bottom of building 74% 89% 100% 75% 77% 96%

Air seal – vertical shafts 69% 85% 100% 71% 72% 95%

Wall insulation, as per building condition report 89% 91% 100% 85% 91% 97%

roof insulation, as per building condition report 90% 92% 100% 83% 92% 97%


Achieved BOMA BESt Level 2Energy Score: 69

in October 2011, royal Bank Building, owned by Melcor developments Ltd., became the first commercial property in downtown Edmonton to provide building electricity and heat utilizing Combined Heat and power (CHp), or Cogeneration technology.

CHp technology converts natural gas into both electricity and heat in a single process at the point of use. the natural gas fired reciprocating prime mover acts as the primary boiler for the building with supplemental heat from the central boiler plant. Waste heat is recovered from the generator and the prime mover’s water jacket and returned to the heating water, reducing the hours of operation for the central boilers. At the same time the building is absorbing waste heat, it is also generating electricity, which reduces the demand placed on the grid.

Cogeneration is highly energy efficient (80%)13 and as well as providing a building with heat and power, it can deliver a number of environmental benefits. One of these benefits is reducing the fresh water consumed at a water cooled coal fired power generation station. this process can take about 95 Litres of fresh water to produce a kilowatt of electricity. CHp at the royal Bank Building produces approximately 145 kWh. Since October 2011, when the unit was commissioned, it has produced at total of 1,662,000 kWh. this means that approximately 155,000,000 Litres of fresh water have not been withdrawn from the environment. in addition, by using natural gas as fuel, this process reduces the amount of carbon dioxide and sulfur being released into the atmosphere13.

producing electricity and recovering waste heat from natural gas powered Combined Heat and power technology saves money while reducing overall environmental impacts.

13 Melcor developments Ltd & power Ecosystems 2008. retrieved from http://www.bomabest.com/wp-content/uploads/BBEEr-2013-royal-Bank-Benefits-of-Cogen.pdf

royal Bank Building, Edmonton, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2012)

Combined Heat and power plant at royal Bank Building, Edmonton

ROYAL BANK BUiLDiNG, EDMONtON

LEADER iN NEW ENERGY tECHNOLOGY:


c. Energy ManagementEnergy Management BESt practices include having an energy policy in place, regular energy audits, energy monitoring, staff training, as well as on-going preventive maintenance. When looking at overall scores Energy Management scores are not significantly correlated with good energy performance (Figure 41).

However, as with the energy efficiency features, when looking at management and energy performance on a more granular scale, trends become visible – particularly when buildings are grouped by size. regardless of age, there are always some buildings with very high levels of energy consumption despite a very good Energy Management score (Figure 42). there is a relationship between Energy Management scores and EUi for buildings built between 1960 and 1989.

FIGURE 41: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS

Energy Management Score (%)

ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 43: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (1960 and 1989)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 42: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (before 1960)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 44: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (1990 to present)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100


When examining the relationship between the EUi and Energy Management Scores by size there is a correlation between better energy performance and higher management scores, particularly for mid-size buildings (100,000-500,000 ft2) (Figures 46, 47, 48 and 49).

taken as a whole, this suggests that no single variable can be taken in isolation to account for good energy performance. rather both sound management practices and regular maintenance and commissioning of energy efficient features are needed.

No single variable can be taken in isolation to account for good energy performance. Rather both sound management practices and regular maintenance and commissioning of energy efficient features are needed.

the greatestcontributors to a high score are: demand response management measures, and evidence of energy training.

FIGURE 45: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (under 100,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 47: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (250,000 ft² – 500,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 1000

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 46: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (100,000 ft² – 250,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

FIGURE 48: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SCORE AND EUI OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS (above 500,000 ft²)


ekW

h/f

t²/y

r

40 50 60 70 80 90 1000

20

40

60

80

100


As part of Commerce Court’s on-going commitment to sustainability, the gWL realty Advisors property Management team, on behalf of the owners, bciMC realty Corporation, implemented an Energy Master plan (EMp) in 2007 to structure utility management activities. the EMp was based on Energy@Work inc.’s award-winning framework.

Over the next four years, the property Management team assembled the tools and knowledge to aggressively pursue tenant comfort improvements, better building performance and utility conservation, to keep the complex ahead of the curve in the face of newer office towers being built in toronto’s Financial district.

these tools included a utility tracking system, real-time monitoring on each major utility meter, and a calibrated building energy simulation model.

in-depth knowledge was also gathered though 5 ASHrAE level 2 audits, the simulation model calibration process, and monthly discussions with the technical team.

By the end of 2011, the pieces were in place to implement one of the largest Existing Building Commissioning (EB Cx) projects ever undertaken in Canada.

EB Cx is a systematic approach aimed at optimizing building operation, and is a proven means—when done properly—of

Commerce Court is a timeless, 3 million square foot commercial office and retail complex located in the heart of toronto’s Financial district.

14 planyC: greening Buildings & Energy Efficiency. About Local Law 87. 2013. retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/gbee/html/plan/ll87_about.shtml

ExiStiNG BUiLDiNG COMMiSSiONiNG At COMMERCE COURt

SPECiAL FEAtURE

significantly improving tenant comfort, as well as building and utility performance while ensuring occupant safety. in fact, based on its consistent success, new york City recently mandated14 that all existing commercial buildings over 50,000 ft2 be commissioned every 10 years.

Energy@Work was engaged to assemble an EB Cx team—which included engineers specializing in commissioning, representatives from the management and operations teams, relevant contractors, and utility representatives—and to guide the project through the four phases of the EB Cx process.

PHASE 1 – PLAnninG: this phase is the least intensive, but is essential to the success of the rest of the project. in this phase, the objectives, scope, and EB Cx team roles and responsibilities are defined, necessary background information is gathered, and the plan for the rest of the project is specified.

PHASE 2 – inVEStiGAtiOn: this is the most intensive phase. in this phase, monitoring plans are put into place (over 250 control points were tracked on 15-minute intervals producing hundreds of thousands of individual points of data), pre-functional checklists on building systems were completed, and functional tests were performed. the object of this phase is to achieve a holistic knowledge of building systems and operations, and generate a “Master List of Findings” from which measures can be derived. At Commerce Court, over 100 findings were identified during this phase.


PHASE 3 – iMPLEMEntAtiOn: in the implementation phase, measures identified and selected through the investigation are implemented. From the identified findings at Commerce Court, the EB Cx team decided to pursue 64 measures for implementation, including:

• Multiple control sequence changes;

• Sensor calibration and/or replacement;

• pumping system optimization;

• Optimizing outdoor air control and building pressurization.

PHASE 4 – trAnSFEr And PErSiStEnCE: the final phase ensures that obtained savings can be maintained and that operations are equipped with the right tools moving forward. in this case, these tools included sensor calibration forms and procedures, data labeling, real time Monitoring (rtM), a new operator manual, the building model, and a BAS monitoring plan for critical sensors.

rESULtS: Since the EMp was implemented in 2007, Commerce Court has avoided over $5 million in utility costs through conservation and there were an additional $1 million in utility incentives that helped to reduce project costs. the EB Cx project is credited with an overall one-year energy savings in 2012 of 7% resulting in a simple payback period of less than 1 year. Further savings are expected in 2013 as more EB Cx measures and implemented.

COnCLUSiOn: Commerce Court’s results have been outstanding, especially considering the property’s size and complexity, but they aren’t surprising. Existing Building Commissioning produced results at Commerce Court because it was done correctly—enthusiastically supported at all levels, properly funded, and structured based on expert experience. Commerce Court’s success is replicable at almost any property willing to put in a similar level of commitment.

ELECTRICITY DEMAND HOURLY PROFILE COMPARISON – TWO WEEK DAYS (kW)

kW

7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24110 1 2 3 4 5 6

Real Time Data: 10:00 AM�(Five minute intervals to match Hourly Ontario Energy Price – or HOEP)

Peak demand (kW) reduced

Base load (kW) reduced

Early equipment start-up eliminated

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

Hour

19-Jan-12 14-Jun-13

Commerce Court’s typical daily electricity demand in 2013 (blue line) compared to a typical weekday in early 2012 (red line). notice that the baseload in early morning is reduced, equipment start-ups delayed, and peak demand reduced. real-time data comes directly from the main toronto Hydro electric meter at five-minute intervals.


Buildings across all BOMA BESt Levels as well as across building age score well for energy management practices (table 2). the greatest contributors to a high score are: demand response management measures, and evidence of energy training.

despite growing evidence that sub-metering is extremely helpful for identifying energy saving opportunities as well as facilitating ongoing commissioning practices, this technology is still not commonly found in buildings. Sub-meters are especially critical for building managers seeking to understand the energy performance of individual buildings within an office complex.

ENERGY MANAGEMENT BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


Energy policy 98% 99% 100% 98% 98% 99%

Energy audit 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Energy monitoring 99% 100% 100% 100% 99% 100%

Flattening load profile 79% 94% 94% 78% 87% 88%

Energy training and updates 83% 93% 100% 80% 91% 86%

Energy improvement budget 99% 100% 100% 99% 100% 100%

tenant sub-metering 43% 61% 75% 57% 46% 64%

User-friendly operating manual for all services 94% 97% 100% 93% 97% 93%

preventative maintenance schedule 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

table 2: Energy Management Measures of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

Le Windsor, Montreal, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2012)

Achieved BOMA BESt Level 4 Energy Score: 82

Energy is a priority for Le Windsor. Building management is working closely with occupants and the operational and maintenance team to successfully implement an energy and environment performance contract.

Le Windsor is operated in an integrated way; building systems and procedures are reviewed and optimized every day, ensuring occupant well-being. Ongoing commissioning is performed by an energy analyst committed

to reducing energy consumption and CO2 emissions. While improvements in performance can typically be achieved through the implementation of no-to-low cost projects, occasionally larger investments are required for achieving targets. When this occurs, a team composed of building management and operations staff will meet to thoroughly review all options.

Altogether, these practices enable the building to reduce its energy consumption by at least 2% each year.

LEADER iN ONGOiNG COMMiSSiONiNG:

LE WiNDSOR, MONtRéAL


d. transportation this section is heavily correlated with BOMA BESt certification Level, with Level 2 buildings achieving few transportation points and Level 4 buildings performing consistently well. good access to (frequent) public transportation services is a common thread across BOMA BESt certification Levels (table 3). this highlights the quality of Canada’s public transit infrastructure.

As noted above, there is still much room for improvement within this section, especially regarding the implementation of low-cost features that greatly assist in reducing dependence on single-occupant vehicles. these include installing shelter over bicycle racks, and creating a communication plan with building occupants regarding car-pooling.

table 3: transportation Features of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

TRANSPORTATION BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


Access to public transit 93% 94% 100% 98% 94% 89%

Frequent public transportation service 86% 83% 94% 87% 84% 84%

Sheltered bike racks 51% 69% 89% 44% 63% 64%

Changing facilities for cyclists 51% 76% 100% 60% 61% 72%

Communications with building occupants to facilitate carpooling

49% 73% 100% 69% 56% 71%

dr. Burton Craig Building, Saskatoon, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)


15 nrCan. Comprehensive Energy Use Database Table: Offices Secondary Energy Use and GHG Emissions by Energy Source (1990 to 2010). retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/corporate/statistics/neud/dpa/tablestrends2/com_ca_19_e_4.cfm?attr=0

16 to perform your own calculation of greenhouse gas emissions and how these relate to a variety of metrics, visit the U.S. EpA Greenhouse Gas Equivalency Calculator retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html

17 Environment Canada. National Inventory Report 1990-2011: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada – Executive Summary. retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=A07AdAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822

18 Environment Canada. Total Generation by Fuel (2009). retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/energie-energy/C00Ad28F-5C87-4C64-97BF-98CBCC8EEFF6/totalgenerationByFuel.jpg

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

FIGURE 49: CO2 EMISSIONS OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

kg CO2 e/ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

11.2

11.5

9.2

9.9

1.9

2.1

8.6

7.0

2.9

25.9

18.9

19.4

22.5

1.6

3.2


Average: 10.0

FIGURE 51: CO2 EMISSIONS OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY AGE AND SECTOR

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

Post – 1990

1960 – 1989

Pre 1960

8.38

12.09

9.99

5.79

8.22

10.46

Private Sector Public Sector

kg CO2e/ft²/yr

Average: 10.0

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

kg CO2 e/ft²/yr

FIGURE 50: CO2 EMISSIONS OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

20.4985

9.4257

7.7613

2.8849

Average: 10.00

CArBOn diOXidE EMiSSiOnSthe total CO2 emitted by all 2012 BOMA BESt Level 2 to 4 certified office buildings, representing 81.4 million square feet of office space, is 597,025 Mt. if these buildings were performing at the national average, they would be emitting 757,265 Mt15. the difference is 160,240 Mt of CO2 not emitted by BOMA BESt buildings – which represents the equivalent of removing 33,383 cars from the road for one year, or the capacity of 82,090 square city blocks of pine forest to store CO2 for one year16.

CO2 emissions show regional variations consistent with the different sources of electricity generated across the provinces17,18. As shown in Figure 49, carbon emissions are highest in the Saskatchewan and Alberta regions and lowest in Quebec and British Columbia.

BOMA BESt buildings have avoided emitting 160,240 Mt of CO2 – the equivalent of planting 82,090 square city blocks with pine trees to store CO2 for one year16.


this section reports on water consumption, the water-conserving features of buildings as well as water management practices. A successful water management program begins with an understanding of how the facility and its occupants use and dispose of water. this makes it possible to plan effective measures to achieve consumption reductions.

Annual water consumption is given for each building in cubic metres per square metre (m3/m2). it is based on water consumption over a 12 month period and is verified through a review of water bills. the Water section rewards low water use. Similar to energy use intensity, the average water consumption of certified office buildings has been improving over the years, indicating that the water consumption reduction programs and technologies available in the marketplace are having an impact (Figure 54).

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

FIGURE 52: AVERAGE WATER SCORE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

73.7

78.4

88

93

65.1

73.7

72.1

73.6

75.6

78.6

78.7

76.6

73.0

74.1

68.9


Average: 73.4

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Water Score

FIGURE 53: AVERAGE WATER SCORE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY CLIMATE ZONE

74.1

89.7

72.7

71.8

Average: 73.4

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

FIGURE 54: AVERAGE WATER USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY YEAR

0.65

0.97

0.98

1.01

1.13

Water consumption in certified office buildings has been steadily declining over the years.


Water consumption varies widely as shown in Figure 55, from 0.1 m3/m2 to over 2.2 m3/m2.

the overall average water consumption intensity for BOMA BESt certified office buildings is 0.6 m3/m2, which is significantly better than the national average (2.03 m3/m2) for water consumption in commercial buildings19.

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

FIGURE 56: AVERAGE WATER USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

m³/m²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

0.6

0.5

0.3

0.3

0.8

0.7

0.9

0.6

0.5

0.9

0.7

0.7

0.5

0.6

0.8


Average: 0.68

19 SdtC. Commercial Buildings – Eco Efficiency SD Business Case. 2007. retrieved from http://www.sdtc.ca/uploads/documents/en/EcoEfficiency-Buildings.pdf

FIGURE 55: WATER USE DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

m³/m²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

Average: 0.68

Median: 0.56


there is little correlation between building size and water consumption, as shown in Figure 58. Since large buildings typically play host to a wide range of high-impact water features such as cooling towers and more extensive food services, there are great opportunities for water savings through targeted demand reduction management practices.

regardless of the building age, the majority of BOMA BESt buildings have clear water conservation management plans, targets and practices in place (table 4). in regards to water conserving fixtures, these are more frequently found in newer buildings than older buildings. this finding is not surprising when considering the higher costs associated with performing retrofits in older buildings. nevertheless, it is important to note that not all newly constructed buildings have taken advantage of the low-flow technologies available on the market at the time of construction. there is therefore still room for improvement in regards to the installation of water conserving features across buildings of all ages.

Climate Zone D

Climate Zone B

Climate Zone A

Climate Zone C

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

m³/m²/yr

FIGURE 57: AVERAGE WATER USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION AND SECTOR

0.6

0.3

0.7

0.7

Average: 0.68

Over 500,000

100,000 – 250,000

Under 100,000

250,000 – 500,000

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

m³/m²/yr

Bu

ildin

g S

ize

(ft²

)

FIGURE 58: WATER USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY SIZE AND SECTOR

Average: 0.68


0.75

0.74

1.04

0.53

0.71

0.67

0.69

0.47

FIGURE 59: WATER USE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY AGE AND SECTOR

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00

Post – 1990

1960 – 1989

Pre 1960

0.54

0.50

0.81

0.66

0.94

0.76

m³/m²/yr

Year

Co

nst

ruct

ed


Average: 0.68

Buildings of all ages will benefit from increased installation of

water conserving features.


WATER BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


Water conserving toilets (more than 40% of fixtures) 50% 74% 100% 49% 60% 78%

Water conserving urinals 43% 68% 100% 44% 53% 66%

valve controls and/or proximity sensors 42% 74% 89% 40% 58% 63%

Water conserving faucets 54% 88% 100% 65% 69% 76%

Written water conservation policy 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Water consumption monitoring 87% 94% 100% 82% 92% 92%

Water audit conducted within the last three years 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Water-reduction targets 81% 92% 100% 87% 86% 84%

table 4: water Conservation Features and Management Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

25 york Street, toronto, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2012)

Achieved BOMA BESt Level 4 Water Score: 96

By installing state of the art water conservation technologies, as well as implementing a stringent Water Conservation policy, 25 york Street has achieved water reduction targets that are 22% below those of a conventional building.

regular inspections and a detailed preventative maintenance program allow building staff to efficiently identify and address any indication of water waste.

Examples of state of the art technologies used in the building include the rainwater reclaim system. Once rainwater is collected

from both the roof and plaza, it is routed to an underground rainwater collection which subsequently dispenses a filtered water supply to various points of use throughout the facility. the system is automated, controlled by the main Building Automation System. the collected water is supplied to flushing fixtures up to the 10th floor, as well as to the irrigation system. Steam condensate is collected and water droplets are deposited into the cistern system to be used as non-potable water.

Low-flow fixtures include: dual flush toilets (6/4.2 Litres per flush), faucet aerators (1.9 Litres per minute) and urinals (1.9 Litres per flush). Annual water audits and monitoring allows for ongoing consumption assessment.

LEADER iN WAtER CONSERvAtiON:

25 YORK StREEt, tORONtO


the Waste reduction section of the BOMA BESt assessment examines whether or not various

recycling programs and facilities have been implemented for tenants along with regular waste audit practices.

the Site section assesses site contamination and the presence of site-enhancement measures to improve the site’s ecological value.

Each of Canada’s provinces and municipalities has its own waste management related infrastructure in place. this is reflected in the score differences demonstrated in Figure 61. Context for these differences is provided below (although many of the resources available on waste diversion focus specifically on residential rather than commercial trends)20,21:

• Western Canada has a deposit return depot system for beverage containers but minimal curbside recycling for other materials (although this is changing). Ontario has extensive residential curbside recycling. Consequentially, paper and organic material diversion rates are higher in that region;

• Ontario is the only province with legislation that mandates the industrial, Commercial and institutional (iC&i) sector to conduct an annual waste audit22. Calgary, through the greening Calgary program, has been looking to Ontario regulation for guidelines on developing its own legislation regarding waste audits23;

• Municipal governments play a large role in developing waste diversion infrastructure. Buildings located within active metropolitan centres will benefit from existing programs. Calgary, vancouver and toronto have been working towards achieving greater diversion rates within the iC&C sector.

nearly half of BOMA BESt buildings in the sample (45%) divert between 30 and 60% of their waste from landfill. this is a reduction in performance from last year, where the majority of BOMA BESt buildings diverted between 60 and 90% of their waste.

the majority of BOMA BESt certified buildings, regardless of building age or Level achieved, have good waste management practices in place (table 5) – from various levels of recycling and composting to setting waste diversion targets – these activities all help to reduce a building’s environmental impact while also creating avenues through which to engage building occupants.

Although the vast majority of buildings have contamination-free building sites, there are still many opportunities available for buildings seeking to improve the ecological value of the site such as through site remediation with native species and removal of water-intensive landscape features. improving the site’s ecology helps to provide occupants with a healthful and positive environment, while also ensuring the site’s ecological legacy.

20 Statistics Canada. Waste Management Industry Survey: Business and Government Sectors (2008). retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16f0023x/16f0023x2010001-eng.pdf21 CM Consulting. Who Pays What: An Analysis of Beverage Container Collection and Costs in Canada. August 2012.

retrieved from http://www.cmconsultinginc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/WpW2012-final-report.pdf22 3rCertified. Sector Resources. 2013. retrieved from http://www.3rcertified.ca/sector-resources23 City of Calgary. Industrial Commercial Institutional Waste Diversion Progress Updated. May 2011.

retrieved from http://www.calgary.ca/UEp/WrS/documents/WrS-documents/UEp_iCi_Attachment_3.pdf?noredirect=1

FIGURE 60: WASTE REDUCTION & SITE SCORE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Average: 80.7

78.3

80.4

80.5

85.1

67.8

77.8

77.3

78.0

FIGURE 61: WASTE DIVERSION RATES OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS

Unknown

Under 30%

30 – 59%

60 – 90%

Above 90%

151, 45%

103, 30%

7, 2% 49,

14%

29, 9%


table 5: waste reduction Performance and Management Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

WASTE REDUCTION & SITE BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


there are facilities for storing recyclable materials 98% 100% 100% 100% 98% 99%

there are collection points for recyclables near sources of waste

96% 100% 100% 98% 97% 100%

Composting is done on or off site 49% 66% 82% 56% 50% 73%

A waste audit has been conducted within the last three years

59% 78% 94% 69% 67% 75%

the amount of waste to landfill and diverted waste is being monitored

74% 89% 94% 78% 81% 84%

Over 30% of waste is diverted from landfill 81% 90% 100% 80% 86% 87%

there are waste reduction targets 74% 91% 100% 82% 81% 87%

there is a construction, renovation and demolition waste management plan

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

the site is confirmed to be free of contamination based on document search or site assessment

91% 98% 100% 93% 96% 92%

the ecological value of the site has been enhanced 42% 72% 91% 41% 56% 70%

Scotia plaza, toronto, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

Achieved BOMA BESt Level 3 Waste reduction & Site score: 99

recycling is important, but it doesn’t have to be difficult.

When Scotia plaza first started its recycling program in January of 1990, the diversion rate was lacking at 51%. thanks to building management and tenant commitment and passion, as of March 2013, the diversion rate has risen to 84%.

At Scotia plaza, recycling is made easy with a single-stream system. For convenience, a desk-side recycling container is provided to each employee on all 68 floors. Waste management and reduction efforts extend beyond recycling typical items such as cans bottles, paper and cardboard; electronic and hazardous waste items (such as batteries, electric bulbs, paint, etc.) can also be safely disposed. Scrap metal and wooden skids are recycled accordingly.

A rigorous organics recycling program is available to both office and retail tenants. depending on volume, various sizes of organic bins are provided in all tenant kitchen areas. Scotia plaza provides for the recycling of cooking grease and cooking oils generated by the food services tenants.

to encourage awareness and a sense of ownership amongst tenants, the recycling program requires that each tenant nominate one representative per floor to act as a liaison, ensuring participation and compliance with recycling program guidelines. Many tenants have their own green committees, and proactively find ways to go above and beyond program guide-lines. Ensuring the program remains consistently effective also means a combined effort amongst building staff. Housekeeping takes an active role in upholding compliance and the building’s recycling manager maintains an open dialogue with tenants to foster a community committed to ensuring a thriving recycling program.

“ We have all worked together to make our program a success and we look forward to finding new and creative opportunities to reduce our carbon footprint.” – Frank Mazzone, General Manager,

Scotia Plaza Management Office.

LEADER iN WAStE REDUCtiON:

SCOtiA PLAzA, tORONtO


BOMA BESt assesses the presence of pollutants in buildings such as emissions from boilers; ozone-depleting substances found in refrigerants; fire-fighting equipment; asbestos; pCBs; radon; pesticides; and hazardous materials such as those found in cleaning products, lubricants, water treatment chemicals, and fuels. the Emissions and Effluents section is broken down into the following sub-categories: air emissions and ozone depleting substances, water effluents, hazardous materials, and hazardous products and WHMiS.

Achieved BOMA BESt Level 3 Waste reduction & Site score: 86

Minimizing the building’s impact on the environment was an important priority when Head-Smashed-in Buffalo Jump interpretive Centre was constructed in 1987. the facility

was designed to blend in to the surrounding landscape and is covered in grasses and shrubs that are native to the area. Mechanical vents are painted to blend in with the native grasses which camouflages the building so effectively that it is hard to see until you enter the plaza area. the site also has swales and

Head-Smashed-in Buffalo Jump interpretive Centre, Fort MacLeod, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

FIGURE 62: EMISSIONS & EFFLUENTS SCORE OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

73.0

84.4

86.8

85.6

82.8

89.6

82.3

88.7

Average: 85.3

HEAD-SMASHED-iN BUFFALO JUMP iNtERPREtivE CENtRE, FORt MACLEOD

LEADER iN REDUCiNG SitE iMPACt:

other design features to reduce water run-off and to allow the native vegetation to thrive without any irrigation.

the Head-Smashed-in Buffalo Jump interpretive Centre has also been recognized for its contributions to Sustainable tourism at the 2012 Alberta tourism Awards. Sustainable tourism at Head-Smashed-in Buffalo Jump is achieved by reducing energy and water consumption, increasing recycling programs and reusing materials. the centre supports the regional economy by strengthening site relationships with First nation’s communities and tourism industry partners and enhances the visitor experience by providing opportunities for visitors to more fully appreciate and respect the aboriginal culture.


table 6: Emissions Performance and Management Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

Many buildings still have ozone-depleting substances and high global warming potential refrigerants in their equipment although all have reported implementing have a phase-out plan for these substances (table 6). refrigerant management practices are strong in terms of maintaining an inventory of ozone depleting refrigerants on the premises and providing staff training on operations and maintenance of ozone-depleting refrigerants.

Almost all buildings use certified contractors to manage their refrigerants. the majority of buildings with ozone-depleting, global warming refrigerants do have recovery systems for use during system servicing, repairs or disposal. Although there is little correlation between building age and air emissions and refrigerant management practices newer buildings tend to use less harmful refrigerants.

EMISSIONS BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


Low nOx emitting boilers (>50%) or no boilers 56% 84% 100% 71% 67% 74%

Burners are cleaned, controls monitored and flue are analyzed regularly

98% 100% 100% 95% 100% 99%

the building uses only low ozone depleting substances

6% 16% 28% 10% 26% 31%

the building uses only high ozone depleting substances

40% 28% 11% 36% 29% 15%

the building uses both refrigerants with low and high ozone depleting and global warming potential

30% 19% 9% 27% 21% 16%

there are refrigerant leak detectors 48% 57% 100% 50% 54% 55%

refrigerant recovery system is used during system servicing, repairs or disposal

93% 97% 100% 91% 97% 92%

inventory is maintained of ozone depleting substances on the premises

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

reports are kept on-site of maintenance, leak tests and leak loss

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Staff receive training on operations and maintenance of ozone-depleting refrigerants

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

there is a phase out plan to replace ozone depleting substances

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Certified contractor is responsible for refrigerant maintenance

98% 100% 100% 98% 99% 99%

Halons are present on site 2% 2% 6% 4% 2% 3%


BOMA BESt certified buildings perform well for the management of effluents, hazardous materials, and health and safety (table 7). Occupational health and safety is clearly an issue of critical importance for BOMA BESt buildings.

table 7: Effluents Performance and Management Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

EFFLUENTS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, OH&S BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


drains are protected from chemical spill 84% 89% 100% 85% 85% 92%

there is no asbestos in the building or there is an asbestos management program

98% 99% 100% 100% 98% 92%

region has low radon levels or there are radon mitigation measures

70% 93% 92% 86% 85% 72%

there are no pCBs in the building or there is a pCB management plan

86% 90% 100% 85% 93% 50%

Material safety data sheets (MSdSs) are present and up to date

94% 98% 100% 96% 95% 97%

there is appropriate storage of hazardous products 98% 98% 100% 100% 97% 97%

there is minimal use of pesticides 94% 98% 100% 94% 95% 99%


Although BOMA BESt is inherently focused on assessing the environmental performance of buildings, the program also recognizes the role Occupational Health & Safety (OH&S) plays in achieving good overall building performance.

Standards associated with Occupational, Health and Safety are rapidly changing to address increasingly complex workplace needs. Legislation surrounding workplace health and safety practices are becoming far more sophisticated and stringent: employers are now required to identify, evaluate and communicate workplace and environmental conditions that may have negative effects on worker health, productivity and environment. the BOMA BESt program echoes legislation with its BESt practice (a minimum requirement for achieving certification) on the management of hazardous products, requiring that building owners, managers, and operators remain well aware of what products (chemicals, oils, biocidies, etc.) are present in the building and how these products must be managed. Additional points can be earned when specialized training and education is offered to responsible staff.

in its Indoor Air Quality Tool Kit the Alberta government states that “there is a fine balance between energy conservation (e.g. keeping electricity costs low) while maintaining good indoor air quality and being able to provide occupants with a healthy, comfortable, and productive workplace.”25 indeed, OH&S is a cross-disciplinary area concerned with protecting the safety, health, quality of life and welfare of people engaged in the work place – be they tenants or building staff.

OH&S related issues are important to building owners, manager, operators, and occupants for a variety of reasons:

• Increased tenancy rates: A healthy and safe workplace is perceived as a desirable place to work26.

• Motivated building occupants: Active, and demonstrable commitment to a healthy workplace by building management shows workers that their safety and well-being is important. Availability of staff training and education serve to prevent injury and illness, while also improving job satisfaction.

• Risk minimization: the legal ramifications associated with OH&S incidents can be costly and punitive, both to reputation and revenue. Sound OH&S practices will prevent additional costs associated with employee injury and illness. preventative practices include the availability of medical care, sick leave and disability cost benefits27.

Comprehensive Health and Safety programs are one of the many tools to be used in an integrated approach to improve a building’s performance emphasized in BOMA BESt: from energy management to indoor environment, all such areas of building management impact the quality of life and well-being of its occupants. Continuous improvement of building management will translate to improved building performance.

tHE iMPORtANCE OF OCCUPAtiONAL HEALtH AND SAFEtY iN BUiLDiNGS

“ A safe, healthy, well-managed building is good business.”24

24 government of Alberta. Recommended Practices in Health + Safety: A Guide for Building Owners + Managers. August 2008. retrieved from http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/WHS-pUB_bp006.pdf

25 government of Alberta. Indoor Air Quality Took Kit. August 2009. retrieved from http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/WHS-pUB_gh015.pdf 26 government of Alberta. Recommended Practices in Health + Safety: A Guide for Building Owners + Managers. August 2008.

retrieved from http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/WHS-pUB_bp006.pdf27 idem. On page 10 this document states that “lost time claims costs for (the building owner and manager) industry was $1,431,248 in Alberta” in 2009,

an” increase of more than 200% from 2007”. Furthermore “4403 days of work were lost to (Alberta) workers in 2008 because of workplace injuries”.

SPECiAL FEAtURE


Maintaining a good indoor environment requires a comprehensive approach that takes into consideration various

aspects of an occupant’s health and comfort such as indoor air quality, lighting and noise levels.

Several features and management practices known to contribute to healthy indoor environments are present in most buildings. As shown in table 8, these include having cleaning contracts that require the use of environmentally preferable products, a documented means of addressing tenant indoor air quality (iAQ) concerns, iAQ training for staff, appropriate lighting levels, providing access to natural light in work areas, and acoustic privacy.

Unfortunately, there are several features and management practices beneficial to indoor environment that are not being implemented in many buildings (including Level 4 buildings). these include features such as personal controls over ventilation and lighting as well as implementing a schedule for cleaning lamps and group re-lamping.

FIGURE 63: INDOOR ENVIRONMENT SCORES OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0

Average: 87.8

84.7

89.7

88.7

86.0

87.6

91.1

87.8

85.7

table 8: indoor Environment Performance and Management Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

INDOOR ENVIRONMENT BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


permanent carbon dioxide monitoring 42% 78% 100% 54% 53% 69%

personal ventilation controls 42% 55% 56% 53% 44% 55%

documented efforts to control pollutants at the source 63% 90% 100% 65% 76% 82%

Contracted cleaners are required to use environmentally preferable products

98% 100% 100% 100% 99% 99%

Maintained checklist to control iAQ during renovations and repairs to avoid contaminating the air with fumes and dust

88% 96% 100% 89% 93% 92%

documented protocol for addressing tenants/occupants concerns

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

An iAQ audit has been performed in the past year 58% 67% 89% 76% 68% 63%

Staff is sufficiently trained to implement an iAQ program

99% 99% 100% 99% 99% 100%

Lighting level conform to iES Standards (300 – 500lux)

81% 90% 100% 82% 86% 87%

80% of working areas have access to day lighting 77% 89% 89% 95% 78% 86%

Lighting controls are in place to turn off lights in areas not in use

56% 79% 94% 56% 63% 84%

Schedule for cleaning light fixtures 34% 50% 65% 34% 44% 46%

group relamping program 19% 32% 63% 21% 27% 30%

Acoustic privacy levels are sufficient 88% 96% 94% 100% 88% 93%


this section assesses how well building management is implementing and documenting its

environmental management systems. Such management practices include setting conservation targets, implementing a sustainable purchasing policy, and putting in place an ongoing tenant communication plan which ensures occupants are aware of the building’s environmental initiatives as well as opportunities for becoming energy and environmental stewards within the building.

Buildings across Canada consistently perform very well on the environmental management systems metric (Figure 64).

As shown in table 9, most environmental management practices recommended in the BOMA BESt program are being widely implemented. More buildings would benefit from undertaking tenant satisfaction surveys and developing site maps that identify the location of environmentally significant features (such as hazardous waste), enabling more effective response in the event of an emergency.

FIGURE 64: EMS SCORES OF CERTIFIED OFFICE BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0

100

95.9

97.8

91.7

89.2

94.6

98.2

98.1

Average: 95.6

table 9: Environmental Management Systems Performance and Practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

EMS BOMA BESt LEVEL BUILDING AGE


Written environmental policy 99% 98% 100% 100% 98% 100%

documented energy and environmental performance targets

99% 100% 100% 100% 99% 100%

Written environmental purchasing policy 92% 98% 100% 93% 96% 93%

regularly updated list of environmentally preferred products

96% 98% 100% 100% 98% 95%

policy for purchasing energy saving equipment 92% 96% 100% 95% 94% 95%

documented procedures for appropriate response in the event of a building emergency

99% 100% 100% 100% 99% 100%

plans for responding to power failures 95% 100% 100% 100% 97% 96%

Site maps showing location of environmentally significant features to enable an effective response in the event of a building emergency

47% 61% 67% 47% 57% 51%

Communications strategy to tenants on ways they can contribute to the building's energy and environmental sustainability

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

tenant satisfaction survey 34% 55% 61% 35% 35% 51%


Bell trinity Square, toronto, BOMA BESt Level 4 (Certified 2011)

Originally performed within the context of “race to reduce”28, objectives soon reached beyond the program’s scope. it was at these first meetings that an energy reduction goal was discussed and adopted with all tenants: a 6% reduction in energy consumption over the course of one year (2011 to 2012).

By december 2012, the building was consuming approximately 14.2 ekWh/ft2/yr. this has resulted in over 1 million dollars of avoided costs per year – savings which Mr. Braun is quick to point out can now be used towards offering tenants an even higher level of service.

Below are the five key ingredients critical to Mr. Braun and his tenants’ success:

1. Set a shared goalthe goal should be based on historical consumption data and should be discussed with all tenants beforehand.

Sharing information on why this particular goal is achievable will make the objective real for tenants. Additionally, by setting a goal together, tenants are sharing the responsibility for achieving it. identifying a shared goal gets everyone on the same page, speaking the same language, and allows tenants to more effectively plan their own strategies.

2. Provide meaningful data, regularlyEvery month tenants are provided with individual energy reports – identifying individual consumption patterns. this data is based on tenant feedback regarding what information is necessary to encourage internal decision-making around energy conservation.

good data can also raise one’s curiosity: Why is one tenant consuming much more than the others? When are they consuming more? is employee density higher in certain offices?

StrAtEGY 1: SEt SHArEd GOAL

28 Race to Reduce is a greater toronto Area energy conservation challenge targeting a 10% reduction in energy consumption across all participating office buildings over four years. For more information consult http://racetoreduce.ca/the-race/introduction/

COLLABORAtiON FOR ENERGY CONSERvAtiON At BELL tRiNitY SqUARE, tORONtO

LEADER iN tENANt ENGAGEMENt:

All Suites: 2013 vs. 2012 Monthly Electricity Use (kWh)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

20,000

2012 Target 2013

in 2011, toronto’s Bell trinity Square achieved a Level 4 BOMA BESt Certification. At that time, the building consumed on average 17.91 ekWh/ft2/yr, placing it in the program’s top quartile for energy performance. One year later, thanks to tenant collaboration, energy consumption levels dropped even further, to an impressive 14.2 ekWh/ft2/yr.

despite good energy performance in 2011, general Manager William Braun, of northam realty Advisors Limited, was not satisfied. He knew there were still many opportunities for improvement throughout the building; Mr. Braun and his team set out to engage tenants in a discussion surrounding energy conservation. Quarterly meetings were planned with representatives from each tenant space.


3. Share resultsFeedback on successes is critical for motivation. data that clearly illustrates tenant success can in turn be passed on internally to get colleagues, head office, or the CEO on board with conservation objectives.

4. Providing internal and external benchmarking

Once daily consumption patterns are identified and understood, the data becomes real. Such data can help illustrate how one specific change (for example, delaying equipment start times) can have a measurable and immediate impact on consumption. A little friendly competition can also help; placing tenant consumption along a continuum may provide large users with an incentive to match their peers’ performance.

5. Encourage idea sharing and collaboration

Finally, any initiative’s chances of success will be greatly improved when tenants are provided with an opportunity for discussion, and for sharing ideas and plans. At Bell trinity Square, a portion of the quarterly meetings is dedicated to sharing experiences and ideas regarding energy reduction strategies. in doing so, ideas worth replicating get adopted in other offices; increasing the chance that the building’s energy reduction targets will be met.

With their original goal very much within reach, tenants and management have enthusiastically agreed to renew this goal and reduce energy consumption by another 6% from 2012 to 2013.

StrAtEGY 2: PrOVidE MEAninGFUL dAtA

StrAtEGY 4: intErnAL BEnCHMArkinG

En

erg

y In

sten

sity

(kW

h/ft

²)

Pop

ula

tio

n D

ensi

ty (

Nu

mb

er o

f O

ccu

pan

ts /

1,00

0ft2 )

Energy Intensity Population Density

Bell Trinity Square – Tenant 1 Energy Use Intensity by Floor Ytd, February 2013

Floor 1 Floor 2 Floor 3 Floor 4 Floor 5

0.0 0

0.2 2

0.4 4

0.6 6

0.8 8

1 10

1.2 12

Bell Trinity Square – Tenant Energy Use Intensityby Floor Ytd (kWh/ft2), February 2013

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

En

erg

y In

sten

sity

(kW

h/f

t²)

Tenant 6

Tenant 1 Tenant 2 Tenant 3

Tenant 4 Tenant 5


OVErALL BOMA BESt SCOrES And rAtinGSWith the release of the Multi-Unit residential Building module in January 2012, this is the first year such buildings have been included in the BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report.

the average overall BOMA BESt score for MUrB properties is 78.7% (see Figure 65).

Overall scores vary across the country, with Ontario buildings averaging 77.2% (Level 2) while those in British Columbia averaged 84.3% (Level 3).

PEFORMANCE REPORt

MULti-UNit RESiDENtiAL BUiLDiNG

FIGURE 65: OVERALL BOMA BESt SCORES FOR CERTIFIED MURBS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

79.4

77.2

80.8

84.3

Average: 78.7

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

parkview towers, Burnaby, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2011)


performance scores for each assessment section are featured in Figure 66. A significant difference can be seen in water performance (for which water consumption is only one of several variables); the Atlantic region achieved an average score of 39.8% whereas British Columbia achieved 82%.

FIGURE 66: AVERAGE BOMA BEST SCORES OF CERTIFIED MURBS, BY SECTION AND REGION

Score (%)

Environmental Management Score

Indoor Environment Score

Emissions and Effluents Score

Waste Reduction and Site Score

Water Score

Energy Score

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

97.085.6

88.382.9

39.872.9

64.6

73.3

70.3

81.889.0

70.071.6

82.090.5

69.573.8

86.382.0

96.384.7

100.0

98.5

98.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA


Laurier House, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

Based on these comparison studies, the energy consumption of BOMA BESt certified MUrBs is within the lowest range of average energy use intensity results.

BOMA BESt certified MUrBs consume on average 19 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 0.73 gJ/m2/yr). Factors that influence energy consumption

include building window characteristics, heating system types, and number of occupants. While there is no definitive reference database for multi-unit residential building energy use intensity in Canada, there are nevertheless a number of studies available for comparison (table 10).

table 10: Comparison of energy use intensities from consumer-side studies and supplier-side studies

Study reference # of MURBs in study

Data year Province EUI (ekWh/ft2/yr)

HiStAr database29 55 1999 On 25.6

CMHC/Minto30 133 201 On 22.1

rdH31 39 2005 BC 19.8

FIGURE 67: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED MURBS, BY REGION

Average: 19

kWh/ft²


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

12.3

26.2

3.5

12.1

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

29 Canadian Building Energy End-Use data and Analysis Centre. Energy Consumption and Energy Intensity in Multi-Unit Residential Buildings (MURBs) in Canada (table 3.1.2). 2007, retrieved from www.cbeedac.com/publications/documents/MUrBsrp04.pdf

30 Minto developments inc. & CMHC. Top 10 Energy & Water Saving Tips in Multi-Unit Residential Buildings (Slide 4). 2001. retrieved from www.emtfsask.ca/presentations/saskatoon/06-02-01-duncanHill-CMHC-Cornwall-2005-top10.pdf

31 rdH Building Engineering Ltd. Energy Consumption and Conservation in Mid- and High-Rise Residential Buildings in British Columbia (p.47). 2012. retrieved from www.hpo.bc.ca/sites/www.hpo.bc.ca/files/download/report/MUrB-EnergyStudy-report.pdf


Fuel and electricity intensities show the expected consumption range, which suggests that approximately 51% of energy use within this building type is electricity. reliable data for natural gas and electricity use was only available for 23 out of 37 certified buildings in this sample. As more buildings are included in the data set benchmarks will become increasingly accurate.

FIGURE 68: EUI DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS

ekWh/ft²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

<1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47

Average: 19 Median: 20

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

FIGURE 70: ELECTRICITY INTENSITY DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS

kWh/ft²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

<1.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 17.0 19.0

Average: 8.5Median: 8.4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

FIGURE 69: AVERAGE ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS, BY REGION

kWh/ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

8.7

10.3

4.7

Average: 8.5NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA


Metropolitan towers, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2011)

FIGURE 72: NATURAL GAS INTENSITY DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS

m³/1,000ft²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

<100

.030

0.050

0.070

0.090

0.0

1,100

.0

1,300

.0

1,500

.0

17,00

.0

1,900

.0

2,100

.0

2,300

.0

2,500

.0

2,700

.0

2,900

.0

3,100

.0

3,300

.0

3,500

.0

Average: 1,658

Median: 1,847

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

FIGURE 71: AVERAGE NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS, BY REGION

m³/1,000ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.020

0.040

0.060

0.080

0.0

1,000

.0

1,200

.0

1,400

.0

1,600

.0

1,800

.0

2,000

.0

1,311.71

1,790.87

747.36

Average: 1,658

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA


Water consumption is calculated from water bills and is shown in Figure 73. Consumption ranges are between 179 L/occupant/yr and 399 L/occupant/yr.

32 data on water consumption was only available for 26 buildings.

FIGURE 73: AVERAGE WATER USE OF CERTIFIED MURBS, BY REGION

L/Occupant/Day


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0

262.7

247.1

226.5

Average: 247

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

Number of Buildings

FIGURE 74: WATER USE DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED MURBS32

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

L/O

ccu

pan

t/D

ay

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Average: 247 L/Occupant/Day


Achieved BOMA BESt Level 3 Emissions & Effluents score: 94

yaletown 939, a property consisting of 175 rental apartments and 14 townhomes, achieved a total score of 94% for quality of emissions, effluents and pollution controls and for having good management practices in place for hazardous products, waste, health and safety, and WHMiS.

Successful performance in the Emissions and Effluents assessment area was achieved thanks to the following actions:

• Site technicians are hired through a reputable mechanical maintenance contractor and the operational staff is highly qualified.

• Strategies have been developed to measure and reduce gHg emissions. the building adheres to a documented management plan for Ozone depleting Substances that includes: inventory of refrigerants and records, maintenance reports, loss reports, and leak test results. there is a maintenance contract with a certified contractor for the site’s cooling system and a phase-out plan for ozone-depleting refrigerants is in place.

• documented policies for snow and ice management aim to minimize damage to the environment by minimizing contaminated runoff. Certified environmentally friendly de-icers are used and snow removal is conducted manually using snow shovels and brooms.

• Adequate measures are in place to ensure that food or food waste is well contained and that there are no unprotected openings, securing minimal rodent access.

• A licensed contractor conducts pest-control inspections monthly. integrated pesticide management methods are in place.

• Landscaping practices minimize the use of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer and petroleum-based products.

• Even though the building is only 10 years old, a hazardous building materials survey has been completed and an inventory of these materials has been reviewed and updated (where applicable) on a yearly basis. Material Safety data Sheets (MSdS), spill clean-up kits, and safety equipment such as eye-wash stations are located in an accessible place near the chemical storage areas. the MSdSs are reviewed and updated regularly and WHMiS labels are present on regulated products. inventory and records of the hazardous products/waste, including their removal and disposal, are maintained.

yaletown 939, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

YALEtOWN 939, vANCOUvER

EMiSSiOnS And EFFLUEntS

LEADER iN REDUCiNG EMiSSiONS AND EFFLUENtS:


Achieved BOMA BESt Level 3 Indoor Environment score: 96

Since it directly affects residents’ comfort and quality of life, the indoor environment is a critical assessment area for Bayview @ Coal Harbour’s multi-unit residential building management.

All 225 rental apartments and 14 townhouses are naturally ventilated with bright and spacious suites.

Minimal off-gassing is supported by the building design’s inclusion of kitchen storage units, particularly effective on formaldehyde-containing materials, and use of solely zero-vOC paint. An environmental purchasing policy is followed and the use of environmentally friendly cleaning materials has been in place for over five years.

the site’s cooling tower, located away from fresh air intakes and flue outlets, is equipped with drift eliminators. A maintenance program for cooling towers includes monthly inspection for evidence of mold or slime, which could indicate elevated levels of bacteria, as well as regular treatment of the cooling tower water and complete cleaning every six months.

residents have the opportunity to share their ideas and opinions through various means: an online resident service portal, in-house suggestion box, site office open seven days a week, and annual resident satisfaction survey. Building management maintains extensive records of all service requests and actions taken to address tenant and occupant concerns. there have been no complaints from occupants concerning stale, dry, or humid air, and/or odor transfer.

Altogether, these measures have helped ensure that Bayview @ Coal Harbour residents are happy, healthy and comfortable in their dwellings.

Bayview @ Coal Harbour, vancouver, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)

LEADER iN iNDOOR ENviRONMENt:

BAYviEW @ COAL HARBOUR, vANCOUvER

indOOr EnVirOnMEnt


OVErALL BOMA BESt SCOrES And rAtinGSthe average score for BOMA BESt Enclosed Shopping Centres is 79.3% (see Figure 75).

PEFORMANCE REPORt

ENCLOSED SHOPPiNG CENtRE

Average: 79.3

FIGURE 75: OVERALL BOMA BEST SCORES OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

76.7

76.0

82.1

74.3

82.5

Brentwood town Centre, Burnaby, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2012)


Score (%)





Water Score

Energy Score

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

91.780.782.0

73.061.3

69.3

92.781.0

78.771.0

66.068.7

72.8

59.7

75.5

89.283.3

81.383.6

90.379.3

64.376.3

79.064.5

93.083.5

94.3

95.0

95.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

FIGURE 76: AVERAGE BOMA BEST SCORES OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES, BY SECTION AND REGION

West Oaks Mall, Abbotsford, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)


in order to accurately benchmark energy use in the Enclosed Shopping Centre module, a complete energy profile of the building must be provided which includes energy data for all (leased) tenant areas, common areas (including concessions), service areas, and outside lighting. Factors such as building age, size, type of mechanical plant, and the number of “degree-days”33 in the region will influence energy use.

the energy use intensity distribution (see Figure 77) shows an average annual energy use intensity of 31.40 ekWh/ft2/yr (or 1.21 gJ/m2/yr), which is within the lower end of the range calculated by nrCan for enclosed shopping malls (30.98 – 36.14 ekWh/ft2/yr or 1.2 – 1.4 gJ/m2/yr).

FIGURE 77: AVERAGE EUI OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES, BY REGION

ekWh/ft²/yr


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Average: 31.4

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

38.3

24.9

23.8

52.2

21.3

FIGURE 78: EUI DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

ekWh/ft²/yr

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84

Average: 31.4

Median: 23.16

33 Heating/Cooling degree days (Hdd or Cdd) are a measurement of the energy required to heat or cool a facility to maintain a comfortable indoor temperature.


Water consumption benchmarks for Enclosed Shopping Centres are expressed in Litres per visitor per year (L/visitor/yr). the average

annual water consumption of certified Enclosed Shopping Centres is 12.3 L/visitor/yr. As a comparison, the reported benchmark for European Enclosed Shopping Centres is 4 L/visitor/yr, with the best practice being 1 L/visitor/yr34. there is room for improvement in water conservation practices in Enclosed Shopping Centres buildings across Canada.

FIGURE 79: AVERAGE WATER USE OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES, BY REGION

Litres/Visitor/Year


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

Average: 12.3

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

8.5

13.6

12.2

12.5

15.5

0

1

2

3

FIGURE 80: WATER USE DISTRIBUTION OF CERTIFIED ENCLOSED SHOPPING CENTRES

8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

Litres/Visitor/Year

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uild

ing

s

Average: 12.3

1 1

3

2 2

34 Sonae Sierra. 2007 Corporate Responsibility Report. retrieved from http://www.sonaesierra.com/uploadfiles/crreports/2e220168-2a79-45f8-9fad-c88481e977fc.pdf

there is room for improvement in water conservation practices in Enclosed Shopping Centres buildings across Canada.

Lougheed town Centre, Burnaby, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2013)


OVErALL BOMA BESt SCOrES And rAtinGSthe average score for BOMA BESt Light industrial properties is 73.1% (see Figure 81)35.

35 Many light industrial buildings are a combination of small administration office space, and warehouse or workshop space, BOMA BESt asks for the breakdown of the space use. Where more than 40% of the space is used as either as a warehouse, workshop or office, the building is assigned into that category.

PEFORMANCE REPORt

LiGHt iNDUStRiAL

FIGURE 81: OVERALL BOMA BESt SCORES OF CERTIFIED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

70.3

75.0

74.2

70.0

73.7

Average: 73.1

Beaver Creek Business park, 35 Leek Crescent, richmond Hill, BOMA BESt Level 1 (Certified 2012)


Score (%)





Water Score

Energy Score

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

NO DATA

89.070.0

81.093.3

51.062.7

55.0

59.0

55.0

83.588.2

65.367.3

67.075.0

82.047.0

68.052.0

90.084.7

96.5

54.0

82.375.575.5

68.0

77.3

86.0

100.0

NO DATA

FIGURE 82: AVERAGE BOMA BESt SCORES OF CERTIFIED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, BY SECTION AND REGION

1775 Meyerside drive, Mississauga, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2011)

6100 Kenway drive, Mississauga, BOMA BESt Level 1 (Certified 2011)


PEFORMANCE REPORt

OPEN AiR REtAiL

OVErALL BOMA BESt SCOrES And rAtinGSthe average score for BOMA BESt Open Air retail properties is 78%, lower than the 2011 average of 81.1% (see Figure 83).

FIGURE 83: OVERALL BOMA BEST SCORES OF CERTIFIED OPEN AIR RETAIL, BY REGION

Score (%)


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

NO DATA

70.0

79.3

81.3

71.0

Average: 78.0

dorval East, Oakville, BOMA BESt Level 2 (Certified 2012)


Score (%)





Water Score

Energy Score

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0


Atlantic

Quebec

Ontario

Manitoba

Alberta

BritishColumbia

Saskatchewan

NO DATA

NO DATA

75.072.0

78.068.0

62.054.0

69.8

68.0

62.0

74.385.084.3

57.8

91.089.0

77.769.3

53.065.0

67.085.0

94.5

98.0

92.0

NO DATA

NO DATA

FIGURE 84: AVERAGE BOMA BESt SCORES OF CERTIFIED OPEN AIR RETAIL, BY SECTION AND REGION

Westmount place, Waterloo, BOMA BESt Level 3 (Certified 2012)


the 2013 BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report demonstrates that buildings participating in the program over several recertification cycles achieve higher performance levels than at baseline. the BOMA BESt model of continuous improvement supports this finding. program recommendations provide building owners and managers with measurable data useful for internal benchmarking and for informing future initiatives.

However, while scores increase and consumption intensities decrease every year, the rate of improvement of Canada’s existing building stock remains slow overall, with comparatively few buildings achieving the higher levels of performance (Level 4). it is BOMA Canada’s hope that the case studies featured in this year’s report, as well as those in previous reports, will help inspire and motivate building owners and managers to continue to persevere, seeking continuous improvement of their building’s performance year after year.

in order to reach these higher levels of performance it is critically important to understand that no single variable can be effective in isolation. in the case of energy, installing new technologies will likely only lead to a reduction in energy demand if it is also implemented in conjunction with effective

management practices and tenant engagement strategies. this message is consistent with industry studies that reveal that relying only on automated energy efficient technologies for achieving energy reductions may in fact be a leading cause of energy inefficiencies.

Such an integrated approach can be seen in many BOMA BESt certified buildings built between 1960 and 1989, where thanks to ongoing commissioning and major retrofits these buildings are achieving levels of performance similar to their more modern counterparts.

BOMA BESt building managers and operators are especially consistent in their implementation of management practices surrounding environmental management systems, emissions and effluents, and the indoor environment.

thanks to the practices listed above becoming solidly established across the BOMA BESt sample, Canadian existing buildings are on their way to achieving reductions in environmental impacts and operational costs while improving building performance.

BOMA Canada and all Local BOMA Associations would like to congratulate members for their commitment to improving Canada’s existing building stock.

CONCLUSiON


Figure 1: BOMA BESt Certified Buildings (cumulative)

Figure 2: BOMA BESt Scores – Certification vs. recertification

Figure 3: BOMA BESt EUi – Certification vs. recertification

Figure 4: BOMA BESt Certified Buildings, by type (2012)

Figure 5: Certified Buildings, By region

Figure 6: Canadian Climate Zones

Figure 7: Certified Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 8: Certified Office Buildings, By Size

Figure 9: Certified Office Buildings, by Age

Figure 10: distribution of Certified Office Buildings, by Age and Size

Figure 11: Certified MUrBs, by Size

Figure 12: Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres, by Size

Figure 13: Certified Light industrial, by Size

Figure 14: Certified Open Air retail, by Size

Figure 15: Overall BOMA BESt Scores for Office Buildings, by region

Figure 16: Overall BOMA BESt Scores for Office Buildings, by Canadian Climate Zone

Figure 17: distribution of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and year

Figure 18: number of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Sector

Figure 19: Average Energy Score for Office Buildings, by region

Figure 20: Average Energy Score for Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 21: Average Energy Consumption for Office Buildings, by year

Figure 22: EUi of Certified Office Buildings vs. national Average

Figure 23: EUi distribution of Certified Office Buildings

Figure 24: Average EUi of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Sector

Figure 25: Average EUi of Certified Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 26: Average EUi of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 27: Average natural gas Use of Certified Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 28: Average natural gas Use of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 29: Average Electricity Use of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 30: Average Electricity Use of Certified Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 31: Average EUi of Certified Office Buildings, by Age and Sector

Figure 32: Average EUi of Certified Office Buildings, by Size and Sector

Figure 33: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings

Figure 34: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (before 1960)

Figure 35: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (1960 and 1989)

Figure 36: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (1990 to present)

Figure 37: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (under 100,000 ft2)

Figure 38: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (100,000 ft2 – 250,000 ft2)

Figure 39: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (250,000 ft2 – 500,000 ft2)

Figure 40: EEF Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (above 500,000 ft2)

Figure 41: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings

Figure 42: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (before 1960)

Figure 43: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (1960 and 1989)

Figure 44: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (1990 to present)

Figure 45: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (under 100,000 ft2)

Figure 46: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (100,000 ft2 -250,000 ft2)

Figure 47: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (250,000 ft2 – 500,000 ft2)

Figure 48: Energy Management Score and EUi of Certified Office Buildings (above 500,000 ft2)

Figure 49: CO2 Emissions of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 50: CO2 Emissions of Certified Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 51: CO2 Emissions of Certified Office Buildings, by Age and Sector

Figure 52: Average Water Score of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 53: Average Water Score of Certified Office Buildings, by Climate Zone

Figure 54: Average Water Use of Certified Office Buildings, by year

Figure 55: Water Use distribution of Certified Office Buildings

Figure 56: Average Water Use of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 57: Average Water Use of Certified Office Buildings, by region and Sector

Figure 58: Water Use of Certified Office Buildings, by Size and Sector

Figure 59: Water Use of Certified Office Buildings, by Age and Sector

Figure 60: Waste reduction & Site Score of Certified Office Buildings, by region

Figure 61: Waste diversion rates of Certified Office Buildings

Figure 62: Emissions & Effluents Score of Certified Office Buildings, by region

Figure 63: indoor Environment Scores of Certified Office Buildings, by region

Figure 64: EMS Scores of Certified Office Buildings, by region

Figure 65: Overall BOMA BESt Scores for Certified MUrBs, by region

Figure 66: Average BOMA BESt Scores of Certified MUrBs, by Section and region

Figure 67: Average EUi of Certified MUrBs, By region

Figure 68: EUi distribution of Certified MUrBs

Figure 69: Average Electricity Consumption of Certified MUrBs, by region

Figure 70: Electricity intensity distribution of Certified MUrBs

Figure 71: Average natural gas Consumption of Certified MUrBs, by region

Figure 72: natural gas intensity distribution of Certified MUrBs

Figure 73: Average Water Use of Certified MUrBs, by region

Figure 74: Water Use distribution of Certified MUrBs

Figure 75: Overall BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres, by region

Figure 76: Average BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres, by Section and region

Figure 77: Average EUi of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres, by region

Figure 78: EUi distribution of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres

Figure 79: Average Water Use of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres, by region

Figure 80: Water Use distribution of Certified Enclosed Shopping Centres

Figure 81: Overall BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Light industrial Buildings, by region

Figure 82: Average BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Light industrial Buildings, by Section and region

Figure 83: Overall BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Open Air retail, by region

Figure 84: Average BOMA BESt Scores of Certified Open Air retail, by Section and region

table 1: EEF of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 2: Energy Management Measures of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 3: transportation Features of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 4: Water Conservation Features and Management practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 5: Waste reduction performance and Management practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 6: Emissions performance and Management practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 7: Effluents performance and Management practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 8: indoor Environment performance and Management practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table 9: Environmental Management Systems performance and practices of Certified Office Buildings, by Level and Building Age

table10: Comparison of energy intensities from consumer-side studies and supplier-side studies

LiSt OF FiGUrES And tABLES


ASHRAE: American Society of Heating and refrigerating Engineers

BAS: Building Automation System

BBEER: BOMA BESt Energy and Environment report

BOMA: Building Owners and Managers Association

BOMA BESt: BOMA Building Environmental Standard

CDD: Cooling degree days

CFC/HCFC: Chlorofluorocarbon/Hydrochlorofluorocarbon

CHP: Combined Heat and power

CO2: Carbon dioxide

ekWh/ft2/yr: Equivalent kilowatt hour per square foot per year

EB Cx: Existing Building Commissioning

EEF: Energy Efficiency Features

EMP: Energy Master plan

EUI: Energy Use intensity

GHG: greenhouse gas

GJ/m2/yr: gigajoules per square metre per year

HDD: Heating degree days

HVAC: Heating, ventilation, and Air-Conditioning

IAQ: indoor Air Quality

IC&I: industrial, Commercial and institutional

m3/m2: Metre cubed by square metre

MSDS: Material Safety data Sheets

MT: Metric tonnes

MURB: Multi-Unit residential Building

NOx: nitrogen Oxide

NRCan: natural resources Canada

ODS: Ozone depleting Substances

OH&S: Occupational Health and Safety

PCB: polychlorinated Biphenyl

RTM: real time Monitoring

VOC: volatile Organic Compounds

WHMIS: Workplace Hazardous Materials information System

LiSt OF ACRONYMS


3rCertified. Sector Resources. 2013. retrieved from http://www.3rcertified.ca/sector-resources

BOMA Canada. BOMA BESt Energy and Environmental Report. 2011. retrieved from http://www.bomabest.com/wp-content/uploads/BBEEr-2011-FinAL.pdf

Canadian Building Energy End-Use data and Analysis Centre. Energy Consumption and Energy Intensity in Multi-Unit Residential Buildings (MURBs) in Canada. 2007. retrieved from www.cbeedac.com/publications/documents/MUrBsrp04.pdf

City of Calgary. Industrial Commercial Institutional Waste Diversion Progress Updated. May 2011. retrieved from http://www.calgary.ca/UEp/WrS/documents/WrS-documents/UEp_iCi_Attachment_3.pdf?noredirect=1

CM Consulting. Who Pays What: An Analysis of Beverage Container Collection and Costs in Canada. August 2012. retrieved from http://www.cmconsultinginc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/WpW2012-final-report.pdf

Environment Canada. National Inventory Report 1990-2011: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada – Executive Summary. retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=A07AdAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822

Environment Canada. Planning for a Sustainable Future: A Federal Sustainable Development Strategy for Canada. October 2010. retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/dd-sd/default.asp?lang=En&n=d39CB7AC-1#ftn4

Environment Canada. Total Generation by Fuel. 2009. retrieved from http://www.ec.gc.ca/energie-energy/C00Ad28F-5C87-4C64-97BF-98CBCC8EEFF6/totalgenerationByFuel.jpg

government of Alberta. Recommended Practices in Health + Safety: A Guide for Building Owners + Managers. August 2008. retrieved from http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/WHS-pUB_bp006.pdf

government of Alberta. Indoor Air Quality Took Kit. August 2009. retrieved from http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/WHS-pUB_gh015.pdf

Hydro-Québec. Comparison of electricity prices in major North American Cities. April, 2012. retrieved from http://www.hydroquebec.com/publications/en/comparison_prices/pdf/comp_2012_en.pdf

Melcor developments Ltd & power Ecosystems 2008. retrieved from http://www.bomabest.com/wp-content/uploads/BBEEr-2013-royal-Bank-Benefits-of-Cogen.pdf

Minto developments inc. & CMHC. Top 10 Energy & Water Saving Tips in Multi-Unit Residential Buildings. 2001. retrieved from www.emtfsask.ca/presentations/saskatoon/06-02-01-duncanHill-CMHC-Cornwall-2005-top10.pdf

natural resources Canada. Climate Zones for ENERGY STAR qualified Windows, Doors and Skylights. 2011. retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/equipment/windows-doors/1371

natural resources Canada. Commercial and Institutional Consumption of Energy Survey, Summary Report. 2005. retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/statistics/cices06/chapter1.cfm?attr=0

natural resources Canada. Comprehensive Energy Use Database. 2013. retrieved from http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/corporate/statistics/neud/dpa/tablestrends2/com_ca_19_e_4.cfm?attr=0

parliament of Canada. 41st parliament, 1st Session: Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. April, 2013. retrieved from http://www.parl.gc.ca/Housepublications/publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&parl=41&Ses=1&docid=6084985&File=0

planyC: greening Buildings & Energy Efficiency. About Local Law 87. 2013. retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/gbee/html/plan/ll87_about.shtml

rdH Building Engineering Ltd. Energy Consumption and Conservation in Mid- and High-Rise Residential Buildings in British Columbia. 2012. retrieved from www.hpo.bc.ca/sites/www.hpo.bc.ca/files/download/report/MUrB-EnergyStudy-report.pdf

Service Ontario. Ontario Regulation 397/11. August 2011. retrieved from http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2011/elaws_src_regs_r11397_e.htm

Société immobilière du Québec. Certification BOMA BESt. retrieved from https://guideduclient.siq.gouv.qc.ca/rubrique.aspx?rubrique=72

Sonae Sierra. Corporate Responsibility Report. 2007. retrieved from http://www.sonaesierra.com/uploadfiles/crreports/2e220168-2a79-45f8-9fad-c88481e977fc.pdf

Statistics Canada. Waste Management Industry Survey: Business and Government Sectors. 2008. retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16f0023x/16f0023x2010001-eng.pdf

Sustainable development technology Canada. Commercial Buildings – Eco Efficiency SD Business Case. 2007. retrieved from http://www.sdtc.ca/uploads/documents/en/EcoEfficiency-Buildings.pdf

von neida, B. & Hicks, t. (U.S. Environmental protection Agency). Building Performance Defined: the EnergyStar National Energy Performance Rating System. retrieved from http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/tools_resources/aesp.pdf

BiBLiOGRAPHY

http://www.bomabest.com/wp-content/uploads/BBEER-2011-FINAL.pdf

www.bomabest.com

Documents

2013...2 t E A ONME REPO 2013 3 intrOdUCtiOn 3 About the BBEEr 4 About BOMA BESt 5 Five Pillars of BOMA BESt 6 suoun i ntCo i emv omentr p in BOMA BESt buildings 7 MEtHOOLOGYd 8 kEY