Emission Possible: Building an Affordable Path to Net Zero - Watch the Webinar
Interview with Josh Lewis, VP of Engineering at NERVA Energy, and recipient of the prestigious AEE International Energy Innovator of the Year Award.
What is required from public and private sector building owner-operators to build a path to Net Zero carbon?
To chart a course towards Net Zero carbon, public and private sector building owner-operators must first gauge where we stand – our past, present, and anticipated future within the energy landscape. As a G7 member, Canada has a profound moral obligation to decarbonize and control global warming.
This transformation we’re facing is unparalleled in our lifetimes and is akin to mobilizing for war: it necessitates comprehensive planning, attention to detail, and collaborative effort.
With the Paris Accord’s commitments looming – a 45% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 and net-zero readiness by 2050 – the public sector, especially in Ontario, faces an uphill battle. Yet, with the technologies we have today, coupled with holistic planning, unwavering dedication, and strategic leadership, we can reach these ambitious goals.
I envision our journey in three stages:
2020-2030: We’ll make significant initial progress, laying the groundwork for future efforts.
2030-2040: This decade will be critical for optimizing existing systems and eradicating energy waste.
2040-2050: We’ll finalize the net-zero transition, ensuring every step is measured and resources are maximized for efficiency.
Approaching our targets systematically will guarantee we’re making the right decisions at the right times, utilizing our financial resources to their fullest.
What types of carbon emissions reside our buildings?
In our buildings, carbon emissions fall into three scopes:
Scope 1: Direct Emissions from operations.
Scope 2: Emissions from utility supplier operations.
Scope 3: Indirect emissions from activities like materials production, transportation, and waste management.
For the public sector, the focus should be on Scopes 1 and 2, which are the most direct and actionable. Scope 1 encompasses emissions from building operations, including heating via natural gas and other fossil fuels. Scope 2 emissions come from the electricity we purchase, bearing its own carbon cost, albeit a smaller portion of our footprint.
What is the difference between operational and embodied carbon?
Operational carbon pertains to the emissions resulting from a building’s energy consumption. In contrast, embodied carbon is tied to the life cycle of building materials, from manufacturing to installation. While both are important, my expertise and today’s discussion centers around operational carbon, which is a significant contributor to our energy use profile.
In public buildings, heating, cooling, and ventilation are the primary drivers, accounting for about 65% of energy consumption. With most HVAC systems in Canada reliant on combustion, particularly natural gas, this is where we find the bulk of our Scope 1 carbon emissions. Optimizing these systems is critical to reducing operational carbon and moving towards Net Zero.
Are heating, cooling & ventilation the top energy consumers in buildings?
Indeed, heating, cooling, and ventilation account for approximately 65% of total energy usage in public buildings. This is not only the largest slice of our energy pie but also the most controllable. Tackling HVAC systems is essential – they must be our primary focus to optimize for energy efficiency and set the stage for a cost-effective conversion plan for the future.
In considering future projects, whether they involve capital renewal, new construction, deep retrofitting, or maintenance, we must apply a 20-year perspective, mindful of the volatile nature of utility rates, especially natural gas, and the federal carbon tax implications. This chart illustrates the volatility of electricity rates across Canada and the market-driven nature of natural gas.
How do I manage the Federal carbon tax?
The Federal Carbon Tax is a market-oriented mechanism aimed at making carbon emissions costly to encourage market-wide eco-friendly choices. This tax incentivizes conservation efforts and drives innovation by attaching a price to the carbon emissions from natural gas and fossil fuel consumption.
As depicted in the provided graph, the carbon tax is set to increase annually, and while projections beyond 2030 are not confirmed, economic models suggest we may see rates between $300-$500 per tonne to meet our climate obligations. These combined factors underscore the financial and environmental benefits of moving away from gas and optimizing our usage.
Where is most of the Carbon Tax coming from?
The carbon tax is inherently tied to our consumption of natural gas and other fossil fuels. So, the primary contributors are natural gas-fired equipment like boilers and HVAC systems, along with any gas-powered appliances within our operations.
This graph differentiates the two main sources of carbon. While electricity does contribute to our carbon footprint, most provinces have a relatively clean grid, making electrical carbon emissions negligible compared to those from natural gas.
Optimizing systems such as chillers, cooling towers, and even lighting won’t yield significant carbon savings. Decarbonization will come from targeting heating, cooling, and ventilation – by optimizing HVAC systems, we tackle the most significant piece of the carbon pie.
What are the most important steps required to get to Net Zero?
The most crucial step towards Net Zero is the conservation of existing energy within our buildings. By eliminating energy waste, we can potentially achieve 60-80% of our 2030 goal for carbon reduction, laying the groundwork for continued success as we advance towards net zero.
The benefits of eliminating energy waste are immediate: reduced energy costs, carbon tax obligations, maintenance costs, and extended equipment life. It also allows for right-sizing future equipment, crucial for the eventual shift to greener energy sources such as heat pumps, an investment that offers lower operational costs.
What are the stages of an integrated approach moving forward?
An integrated approach begins with reducing thermal and electrical loads, focusing on operational efficiency to eradicate energy waste. Building envelope upgrades and heat recovery systems should be considered on a tiered schedule aligned with building renewal rather than retrofit strategies.
Following load reduction, we must electrify gas-burning equipment and secure additional electric service capacity for properties. This paves the way for transitioning to air or ground source heat pumps and procuring renewable power, such as solar, to offset grid emissions. Lastly, we must create a resiliency plan for the ongoing operations of our buildings.
How do you fund the Path to Net Zero?
Funding options such as the Canadian Infrastructure Bank’s building Retrofit initiative provide unique opportunities for financing the journey to Net Zero. Public and private sectors must think outside the box to make this journey financially viable. Programs like SOFIAC offer no-risk, off-the-books financing structures supported by the federal government.
However, we cannot solely rely on government support; building owners and operators must develop independent plans to ensure a practical and cost-effective journey to Net Zero.
About Josh Lewis
Josh, an esteemed recipient of several prestigious industry accolades, including the AEE International Energy Innovator of the Year award, brings decades of experience and distinguished expertise to the forefront. He stands as one of Canada’s foremost authorities on energy conservation, carbon reduction strategies, and high-performance building design.