The past two days we have written about various aspects of the 18 month progress of the ecoENERGY Residential Retrofit program. In this article we conclude our review of this progress.
First, how much energy has been saved on an annual basis by those homes who have had both the D and E energy efficiency assessments completed?
The chart below shows the energy consumption, measured in GJ’s per house, estimated during the D energy audit, the calculated Ultimate consumption if all of the recommendations were to have been implemented by the home owner, and the estimated energy consumption per the E energy audit: the difference between the energy consumption at the D and E energy audits is the energy savings, again measured in GJ’s per house:
Home Built Period Energy Energy
Consumption Savings
D / U / E
- Before 1945 274 / 163 / 183 91
- 1945-1959 204 / 131 / 150 54
- 1960-1969 190 / 127 / 145 45
- 1970-1979 174 / 123 / 134 40
- 1980-1989 177 / 129 / 140 37
- 1990-1999 165 / 126 / 134 31
Now, let’s turn to what type of energy conservation measures for which grant money is available are Canadian home owners actually implementing? Two charts are provided below.
The chart shows three things: (A) major categories of energy conservation upgrades; (B) percentage of the first or D energy audits containing that energy conservation upgrade; and, the percentage of the second or E energy audits also containing that energy conservation upgrade:
Upgrade Type D E
- Basement 56% 21%
- Attic 60% 25%
- Walls 29% 12%
- Draftproofing 76% 84%
- Space Heating 61% 65%
- Windows & Doors 63% 28%
What can we interpret from the above?
One could debate whether funding from the Federal Government is sufficient to motivate Canadian home owners to undertake all of the recommendations in the initial or D energy audit report. Why? Well, 63% of the D energy audit reports include recommendations related to windows & doors but only 28% of home owners are making the investment. Somehow I still think that $30 per ENERGY STAR windows are not sufficient to motivate most home owners to make the investment in these type of windows which are among the most expensive.
Surprisingly, while 60% of the homes could benefit from increased attic insulation only 25% are undertaking this energy conservation approach. This I do find surprising. When we purchased our current house it was among the first energy conservation tactic that we had done. A home owner can achieve several hundreds of dollars of Federal grant money, matched by most Provinces and Territories, for increasing attic insulation. The actual amount of the available grant depends on the insulation (R) rating at the D energy audit and the insulation rating at the E energy audit.
Warm air rises to the top. Keep the heat inside. Insulate your attic.
I was also surprised that basement insulation upgrade was recommended on 56% of the D energy audit reports yet only undertaken 21% of the time. The only reason I can come up with is that typically insulating basement walls is done as part of an overall basement finishing project which is not cheap.
We hope you enjoyed our review the past three days of the ecoENERGY Retrofit programs achievements over the first 18 months. We’ll be back in another 6 months to review the achievements over the first full two years.
5 responses so far ↓
1 Trina Stewart // Nov 7, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I have reviewed your final article. I think our evaluators are lacking vital information and education of product to effectively promote the benefits of Energy Efficiency. There is a 100% percent pay back in regards to insulation. In fact, my neighbour paid 600 to insulate his attic and I believe received $700.00 back from the Feds and Ministry of Energy.
Consumer’s need the in house presentation at the time of the D evaluation so the evaluator will remember to cover every angle. The more they know about product, the more effective the results of the evaluation will be.
2 Dan // Nov 7, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Hi Trina,
You make an interesting observation. Part of this is up to the individual ‘evaluator’ when they are on site, part up to their employer’s training, etc., etc.
I will also add, however, that one of my disappointments with the ecoENERGY Residential Retrofit program is that many of the grants do not take into account size.
For example, $30 for an ENERGY STAR rated window; this is regardless of the size of window. It could be a 2′ X 2′ window, or a 5′ X 5′ window, yet the amount of the grant remains the same while the cost to the home owner does not.
Regarding attic insullation, again size does not matter in the program. Yes, the degree of insullation improvement does impact the size of the grant, but not the size of the ceiling being insullated. I’ll go out on a limb here, but if I was a betting man I would be willing to bet that your neighbour who paid $600 to insullate his attic was in a small two or three story house. We live in a 1,700 square foot bungalow and the cost we paid from Direct Energy to insullate our attic was more than double the price your friend paid. Yet, we would have only received the same amount of grant money under the program.
Thank you for your comments and adding to the discussion, Trina.
Dan
3 Trina Stewart // Nov 7, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Very true!! In fact, I never thought about the program in the perspective of size.
In regards to windows, well it’s a very delicate subject. NR Can does not look kindly to big box window companies promoting the program due to the fact that windows do not have the same energy improvement as space heating or basement insulation. Many window companies promote that you can save 30% off your energy bill. Make sense of that? Well it has to do with the cooling months opposed to the heating months. You’d have to talk to SAWDAC about that.
In regards to the EcoEnergy program, I’ve have been involved with the program since 2004 and I am currently unemployed. I took a job with a BC company who decided to branch out in Ontario. I decided to take on this position because they were presenting the EcoEnergy Report at the time of the D evaluation. This means that the evaluator is taking the data and inputting the data. Hence, giving the report a more concise synopsis. Suffice to say, he did not charge extra for this and many of the evaluators turned up their noses to the extra work with the same amount of pay as a “data collector”. Unfortunately, his business did not work out in Ontario but I hope that one day NR Can will once again make this madatory. Right now, it’s McDonald’s versus Kelseys. I believe the only company who offers this service is ACAN (a liciensed EcoEnergy Provider) in your area.
4 Herb // Nov 8, 2008 at 3:14 am
The size issue was also of concern to me. I am in the process of insulating my basement and floor joist header area. I am using 6″ R20 pink fibreglass for the joist header ares and 2″ R10 Dow Wallmate insulation for the walls. I have approx 180 lineal feet of basement wall that will cost me close to $2500 to get a payback of $500 from the Feds and another $500 from the province. If i was to increase the Rfactor to greater than R23 that amount would double. I am trying to figure out how they came up with R23… It just seems like an odd #. After I priced the Dow Wallmate in Canada at $24.50 for a 2″ x2′x8′ sheet I called a supplier across the border in New York State and was quoted $9.50 a sheet for the same stuff. It really burns me that Companies like Dow are taking advantage of the Canadian consumer. It was certainly worth trip and the border folks were completely understanding.
5 Dan // Nov 8, 2008 at 3:50 am
Hi Herb,
Nicely done with the cross border shopping comparison.
Even with the recent difference in the exchange rates again, sometimes there are still price advantages to be had shopping in the USA.
Dan
Leave a Comment