The National Building Code of Canada (NBC) does not currently assign energy conservation points to ceilings below attics, cathedral ceilings or flat roofs, exposed floors or slabs-on-grade that exceed the minimum Code requirements.
Failure to assign energy conservation points to new conservation measures will not allow Code users to benefit from obtaining the associated energy savings when performance levels for these components exceed the minimum performance required by Energy Performance Tier 1, for the purposes of demonstrating compliance with the prescriptive trade-off path. These Code users would then need to demonstrate compliance using the energy performance path, which might necessitate hiring a professional energy advisor.
In order to accumulate the total energy conservation points required for compliance with higher tiers in the prescriptive trade-off path, Code users should have additional options for energy conservation measures than those currently provided in the Code.
This proposed change assigns energy conservation points for ceilings below attics, cathedral ceilings and flat roofs, exposed floors and slabs-on-grade for the purposes of compliance with the prescriptive trade-off path.
If energy conservation points are assigned to these building envelope measures that exceed the minimum energy performance required by Tier 1, the Code users who choose to install these measures will benefit from the additional options for demonstrating compliance with a higher energy performance tier.
This proposed change also assigns energy conservation points for combined roof systems consisting of ceilings below attics and cathedral ceilings or flat roofs to provide Code users with more options to receive a representative number of points based on roof design. For combined roof types, an average RSI of 5.80 is assumed for flat roofs, which is higher than the minimum for all climate zones. The thermal insulation of flat roofs becomes significantly cost inefficient beyond 5.80 RSI. Assigned energy conservation points gradually decrease as the climate zone becomes colder because the building envelope is required to meet a higher insulation baseline, which reduces the significance of the energy savings.
Additionally, this proposed change adds granularity for energy conservation points provided in tabulated form for ceilings below attics, cathedral ceilings and flat roofs, exposed floors and slabs-on-grade by allowing interpolation. If this proposed change did not permit interpolation, Code users would only be able to claim the lower of two point values when the energy conservation measure falls between two values listed in proposed Tables 9.36.8.5.-B to -E and 9.36.8.7.-B.
Failure to add additional energy conservation measures might prevent Code users from accumulating sufficient points to comply with higher tiers, as required by their respective jurisdictions.
Energy Conservation Measures for Above-Ground Walls – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/W | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
2.97 | 2.0 | – | – | – | – | – |
3.08 | 3.2 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 2.1 | – | – |
3.69 | 7.4 | 5.4 | 6.2 | 6.7 | 5.4 | 5.2 |
3.85 | 8.2 | 6.0 | 6.9 | 7.4 | 6.2 | 6.0 |
3.96 | 8.9 | 6.8 | 7.7 | 8.2 | 7.0 | 6.8 |
4.29 | 10.2 | 8.1 | 9.2 | 9.7 | 8.6 | 8.4 |
4.40 | 10.8 | 8.7 | 9.9 | 10.3 | 9.3 | 9.1 |
4.57 | 11.4 | 9.3 | 10.6 | 11.1 | 10.1 | 9.9 |
4.73 | 11.9 | 9.7 | 11.1 | 11.5 | 10.6 | 10.4 |
4.84 | 12.3 | 10.2 | 11.6 | 12.1 | 11.2 | 10.9 |
5.01 | 12.9 | 10.7 | 12.2 | 12.7 | 11.8 | 11.6 |
5.45 | 14.0 | 11.9 | 13.6 | 14.0 | 13.3 | 13.1 |
Energy Conservation Measures for Ceilings Below Attics – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/WPROPOSED CHANGE Table Footnote (1) | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
8.67 | 1.2 | – | – | – | – | – |
10.43 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.9 | – | – | – |
12.19 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
13.96 | 3.1 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.3 |
Energy Conservation Measures for Cathedral Ceilings and Flat Roofs – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/WPROPOSED CHANGE Table Footnote (1) | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
5.02 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | – | – | – |
5.80 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
6.49 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
Energy Conservation Measures for Ceilings Below Attics– Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/WPROPOSED CHANGE Table Footnote (1) | Energy Conservation Measures for Cathedral Ceilings and Flat Roofs– Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/W(1) | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
||
Energy Conservation Points | |||||||
8.67 | 5.80 | 1.3 | – | – | – | – | – |
10.43 | 5.80 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | – | – | – |
12.19 | 5.80 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
13.96 | 5.80 | 2.5 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.1 |
Energy Conservation Measures for Exposed Floors – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/WPROPOSED CHANGE Table Footnote (1) | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
5.02 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | – | – | – |
5.42 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
6.77 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 |
Energy Conservation Measures for Foundation Walls – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/W | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
2.98 | 1.7 | – | – | – | – | – |
3.09 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | – |
3.46 | 2.2 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.7 | – |
3.90 | 2.6 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.3 | – |
Energy Conservation Measures for Slabs-on-Grade – Minimum Effective RSI Values, (m2×K)/WPROPOSED CHANGE Table 9.36.8.7. Footnote (1) | Heating Degree-Days of Building Location, in Celsius Degree-Days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zone 4 < 3000 |
Zone 5 3000 to 3999 |
Zone 6 4000 to 4999 |
Zone 7A 5000 to 5999 |
Zone 7B 6000 to 6999 |
Zone 8 ≥ 7000 |
|
Energy Conservation Points | ||||||
2.84 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | – | – | – |
3.72 | 1.6 | 1.3 | 1.4 | – | – | – |
4.62 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | – |
This proposed change would improve the affordability of complying with the energy performance tiers through the prescriptive trade-off path by providing additional options for energy conservation measures, which are eligible for energy conservation points. These additional measures included in the proposed change allow Code users to obtain credit for the energy savings associated with building envelope measures that exceed the minimum energy performance of tier 1. Accumulating the appropriate number of energy conservation points in the prescriptive trade-off path is one of the compliance options for Code users. The estimated costs of each option are listed below.
It should be noted that the costs listed in the analysis are estimates that depend on various factors. One method used to conduct the analysis was obtaining cost data for a specific region and adjusting for other regions using the location factors provided by RSMeans. The location factors in Table 1 were used for cost estimation based on 2023 values.
Table 1. Location Factors by Region
Region | Location Factor |
BC | 0.98–1.05 |
AB | 1.02–1.09 |
SK and MB | 0.88–1.07 |
ON | 1.01–1.15 |
QC | 1.06–1.17 |
Atlantic Canada | 0.88–1.05 |
Northern Canada | 1.03–1.12 |
Table 2. Cost Analysis for Ceilings Below Attics (Impact of Proposed Table 9.36.8.5-B)
Effective RSI |
Energy Savings (%) |
Incremental Costs of Insulation(1) ($/m2) | ||||||
BC | AB | SK and MB | ON | QC | Atlantic Canada | Northern Canada | ||
8.67 | 1.2 | 1.93–2.05 | 2.04–2.15 | 1.72–2.15 | 2.05–2.26 | 2.15–2.37 | 1.72–2.05 | 2.05–2.26 |
10.43 | 0.9–2.1 | 1.93–2.05 | 2.04–2.15 | 1.72–2.15 | 2.05–2.26 | 2.15–2.37 | 1.72–2.05 | 2.05–2.26 |
12.19 | 0.7–2.7 | 2.90–3.12 | 3.01–3.23 | 2.58–3.23 | 3.01–3.44 | 3.12–3.55 | 2.58–3.12 | 3.12–3.34 |
13.96 | 1.2–3.1 | 2.90–3.12 | 3.01–3.23 | 2.58–3.23 | 3.01–3.44 | 3.12–3.55 | 2.58–3.12 | 3.12–3.34 |
Source: Task Group on Prescriptive Trade-off Path in Section 9.36.
Note to Table 2:
(1) Insulation type: blown cellulose.
Effective RSI(2) |
Energy Savings (%) |
Incremental Costs of Insulation(1) ($/m2) | ||||||
BC | AB | SK and MB | ON | QC | Atlantic Canada | Northern Canada | ||
5.02 | 0.5 | 7.75–7.86 | 7.42–7.75 | 6.57–7.86 | 6.99–7.43 | 4.84–6.57 | 6.03–7.64 | 8.07–8.29 |
5.80 | 1.0–1.6 | 15.71–15.82 | 14.74–15.61 | 13.13–15.61 | 13.89–14.96 | 13.13–14.21 | 12.16–15.29 | 16.14–16.58 |
6.49 | 1.8–2.3 | 23.57–23.68 | 22.17–23.36 | 19.59–23.36 | 20.88–22.39 | 19.59–21.42 | 18.19–23.04 | 24.21–24.87 |
Source: RSMeans
Effective RSI
|
Energy Savings (%) |
Incremental Costs of Insulation(1) ($/m2) | |||||||
Attics | Cathedral Ceilings or Flat Roofs | BC | AB | SK and MB | ON | QC | Atlantic Canada | Northern Canada | |
8.67 | 5.80 | 1.3 | 8.88 | 8.63 | 8.10 | 8.26 | 7.98 | 7.78 | 9.23 |
10.43 | 5.80 | 1.1–1.8 | 8.88 | 8.63 | 8.10 | 8.26 | 7.98 | 7.78 | 9.23 |
12.19 | 5.80 | 0.8–2.2 | 9.38 | 9.13 | 8.55 | 8.81 | 8.50 | 8.25 | 9.76 |
13.96 | 5.80 | 1.1–2.5 | 9.38 | 9.13 | 8.55 | 8.81 | 8.50 | 8.25 | 9.76 |
Source: RSMeans
Note to Table 4:
(1) Insulation type: blown cellulose (for ceilings below attic); closed cell, spray polyurethane foam (for cathedral ceilings and flat roofs).
The tabulated cost is an approximation for combined roof types assuming an area comprised of 50% ceiling below attic and 50% cathedral ceiling or flat roof. The incremental insulation costs listed in Table 4 represent incremental material costs. The costs gradually increase with an increase in effective RSI values.
Table 5. Cost Analysis for Exposed Floors (Impact of Proposed Table 9.36.8.5-E)
Effective RSI(2) |
Energy Savings (%) |
Incremental Cost of Insulation(1) ($/m2) | ||||||
BC | AB | SK and MB | ON | QC | Atlantic Canada | Northern Canada | ||
5.02 | 0.2 | 7.75–7.86 | 7.42–7.75 | 6.57–7.86 | 6.99–7.43 | 4.84–6.57 | 6.03–7.64 | 8.07–8.29 |
5.42 | 0.2–0.5 | 15.71–15.82 | 14.74–15.61 | 13.13–15.61 | 13.88–14.96 | 13.13–14.21 | 12.16–15.29 | 16.14–16.58 |
6.77 | 0.9–1.1 | 31.86–32.08 | 30.14–31.75 | 26.59–31.75 | 28.31–30.36 | 26.59–29.06 | 24.75–31.22 | 32.83–33.69 |
Source: RSMeans
Notes to Table 5:
(1) Insulation type: closed cell, spray polyurethane foam.
(2) Insulation thickness: 4.5 in. for RSI 5.02, 5 in. for RSI 5.42, 6 in. for RSI 6.77.
The incremental insulation costs listed in Table 5 represent incremental material costs. The costs gradually increase with an increase in effective RSI values.
Table 6. Cost Analysis for Slabs-on-Grade (Impact of Proposed Table 9.36.8.7-B)
Effective RSI(2) |
Energy Savings (%) |
Incremental Cost of Insulation(1) ($/m2) | ||||||
BC | AB | SK and MB | ON | QC | Atlantic Canada | Northern Canada | ||
2.84 | 0.8–1.0 | 20.77–20.88 | 19.69–20.67 | 17.33–20.67 | 18.40–18.62 | 17.33–18.95 | 16.14–20.34 | 21.42–21.96 |
3.72 | 1.3–1.6 | 43.70–43.92 | 41.87–43.49 | 36.49–43.49 | 38.85–39.19 | 36.49–39.94 | 34.01–42.84 | 45.10–46.18 |
4.62 | 0.5–2.0 | 55.54–55.87 | 52.63–54.25 | 46.28–55.22 | 49.40–49.84 | 46.28–50.70 | 43.16–54.47 | 57.26–58.77 |
Source: RSMeans
This proposed change could be enforced by the existing Code enforcement infrastructure.
Designers, engineers, architects, builders and building officials.