1. Recognizing Success Energy Use & Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Canadian Homes 1990 – 2010 Canadian Renovators’ Council, October 2012

2. Three Part Report: CHBA’s Annual update on Residential Sector performance. Closer examination of how new homes have changed based on CHBA/CanmetENERGY analysis. Future potential for energy retrofitting.

3. Residential Share of Canada’s GHGs 19902010 Source: NIR/EC 2012

4. Sector Changes in GHG Emissions 1990 - 2009 Source: CEUD 2012

5. Trends in Stock and Energy Use 1990 = 0 Source: CEUD 2012

6. Energy Intensity Trends 1990 = 0 Source: CEUD 2012

7. Efficiency Trends by House Vintage

8. How Have New Homes Changed?

9. Comparing “Apples to Apples” Total stock trends are useful, but they don’t tell us much about how new homes have changed over time. Existing home energy performance is a ‘moving target’. When comparing old and new homes, what do we learn if we base this on the ‘as built’, rather than ‘as found’ specifications?

10. Our “Apple” 2,100 sq. ft. two-storey home in Ottawa circa 1973 (Four-Square). Initial “As Built” specifications from CMHC/HUDAC costing studies of that time. Additional specifications generated by CanmentENERGY, OBC 2012, R-2000 (2012). Only envelope and mechanical specifications altered to those ‘typical’ of new construction in each period. ‘As Found’ specifications from initial (pre-grant) ERS evaluation. All data generated using HOT2000 V. 10.51

11. ‘As Built’ = ERS 41 ‘As Found’ = ERS 63 = 28.7% improvement ‘Post ecoENERGY Grant’ = ERS 72 = 44.5% improvement Same home built to 2012 OBC would consume 66% less energy than mid-1970s spec.

13. EnerGuide Ratings & Percentage Efficiency Gain Vintage‘As Built’‘As Found’Post ecoEnergy 1961 - 1977ERS 41ERS 63 (+28.7%)ERS 72 (+44.5%) 1978 - 1983ERS 57ERS 66 (+20.8%)ERS 74 (+38.9%) 1984 - 1990ERS 65ERS 69 (+11.5%)ERS 75 (+28.2%) 1991 - 1997ERS 69ERS 69 nilERS 76 (+21.4%) 1998 - 2005ERS 71ERS 71 nilERS 76 (+17.6%) 2006 - 2011ERS 76ERS 76 nilERS 78 (+8.6%) 2012 OBCERS 79

14. Some ‘Low Hanging Fruit’ Remains

15. Filling Out the Household Picture: a 69’ Chevy Impala in the driveway

16. So How’s Detroit Doing? 1969 Chevy Impala2012 Chevy Impala

17. 15.8% Improvement in 43 Years

18. ... and the Impala’s a ‘success story’ Manufacturer/ModelEPA 1978 (with 2008 correction) EPA 2012 Ford/Mustang23 mpg/Combined23 mpg/combined Honda/Accord26 mpg/combined27 mpg/combined Toyota/Corolla29 mpg/combined30 mpg/combined

19. On “Apples to Apples” Basis: 15.8% Increase in ‘Combined’ Fuel Efficiency 66% decrease in total energy consumption (ERS 41 to ERS 79) 78.5% decrease in space heating energy consumption

20. Questions/Discussion?