Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry
Issue 1 - Evidence - Meeting of March 25, 2010
OTTAWA, Thursday, March 25, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met this day at 8:05 a.m. to study the current state and future of Canada's forest sector.
Senator Percy Mockler (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning, senators. I welcome you to this meeting this morning. I am sorry for being five minutes late. I was asked to participate in the Forum for Young Canadians in the Centre Block. We have just dashed back to our committee meeting.
[Translation]
I would like to welcome Gilles Huot to the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
[English]
My name is Senator Mockler. I am from New Brunswick and I am the chair of the committee. I would like to start by asking the senators to introduce themselves.
Senator Mercer: I am Senator Terry Mercer, from Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: I am Senator Fernand Robichaud, also from New Brunswick.
[English]
Senator Fairbairn: I am Senator Joyce Fairbairn, from Lethbridge, Alberta.
Senator Plett: I am Senator Don Plett. I am proud to be from Manitoba.
Senator Ogilvie: I am Senator Ogilvie, from Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: I am Senator Michel Rivard, from Quebec City.
Senator Eaton: I am Senator Nicole Eaton, from Ontario.
[English]
The Chair: The committee is continuing its study on the current state and future of Canada's forest sector.
[Translation]
Today's meeting will focus on the use of wood in non-residential construction. I have been told that your presentation will be very interesting.
[English]
Today, we welcome an architect who was in charge of a different, non-residential wood construction project. I will share with you some of the pictures. Mr. Gilles Huot was in charge of the FondAction building project in Quebec City.
[Translation]
We would like to thank you, Mr. Huot, for having accepted our invitation to speak. I would now like to invite you to take the floor. Your presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer period for the senators.
You have the floor.
Gilles Huot, Architect, GHA Architecture and Sustainable Development, as an individual: I would like to thank you for your invitation and your interest in the FondAction Quebec project.
FondAction, CSN's development fund for cooperation and employment, is a socially responsible financial institution that stemmed from the CSN trade union movement, with which it shares common values.
FondAction is celebrating its 15th anniversary. It is essentially a workers' fund that strives to incorporate sustainable development practices into its corporate culture. It is also an institution that has never hesitated to take the lead and innovate.
I believe that the project I am here to tell you about is innovative because it is the first of its kind in North America. It is the first wooden-frame commercial building that is taller than four storeys.
When it came time, at the end of 2007-08, for CSN's FondAction to construct a new building in Quebec City to house its personnel, it was a given that the building would have to be ecological and LEED certified, since one of FondAction's objectives is sustainable development.
In the beginning, the idea of using a wood-frame construction was not necessarily considered. It was desirable because the CSN wanted to send a positive message to Quebec's institute of forestry by using timber to bring greater ecological value to the project.
In 2008, when project design began, various favourable factors began falling into place. These factors are very important. Without them, it is likely that the project would never have come to fruition.
The project was first envisioned with a concrete frame, but plan B was to use a wooden one. One of the favourable factors that helped get this project underway was the Quebec government's decree favouring the use of timber in public buildings, starting in 2008. The Quebec government then adopted the National Building Code in 2005, maintaining the code's standard parameters, which allow construction professionals to present different approaches to help meet code objectives. As well, Quebec established its construction board, the Régie du bâtiment, to specifically analyze these different approaches. In addition, in May 2008, the Ministère des ressources naturelles et de la Faune introduced its strategy to use wood in construction in Quebec.
In addition, Quebec's Ministère du Développement durable et de l'Environnement had greenhouse gas reduction targets. At the same time, the provincial timber coalition, the Coalition bois Québec, was established. All of these factors helped make this project a reality.
This project is an office building with a surface area of 6,000 square feet on six levels above ground and three storeys of underground parking.
It is an office building designed to accommodate FondAction Quebec's operations and associated organizations or others working mainly in the sustainable development field, like the Fonds d'action québécois pour le développement durable, FAQDD; Filaction, which was started by FondAction and provides risk capital for small businesses; and the Caisse d'économie solidaire de Québec, or CECOSOL.
The National Building Code has always limited the height of wood-framed buildings to four storeys, until the 2005 code. Even in the current code, buildings over four storeys must be built with non-combustible materials. The code does provide for objectives-based design.
The goal is to ensure the safety of the building's occupants, their health and to ensure that they can be evacuated within a reasonable timeframe without putting them in danger. As well, the fire resistance of structural elements must provide a specific level of safety for a given period of time. For office buildings, it is one hour per storey. After one hour, the structural integrity of the building must not be compromised. Those are the code's objectives.
In the Quebec City project, the building was designed with a surface area far smaller than the allowed limit under the code. The surface area of each storey is 1,000 square metres.
That means that there are fewer occupants in this building in comparison to one with a potential surface area of up to 75,000 square feet for a similar building. At 1,000 square metres, the number of occupants is below the maximum, and it is therefore easier to evacuate because there are fewer people per square metre. These are code provisions because access to exits is reduced, allowable distances are reduced, et cetera.
When working with objectives, construction professionals must demonstrate that the safety of the occupants and goods are not in danger. The goal is to prove this to Quebec's construction board. Without going into too many technical details, I will say that we were able to do this with the help of Paul Lhotsky, a fire protection consultant. We successfully showed the board two things: the building structure size was reduced because we know the wood burns at a rate of 6/10 of a millimetre per minute, so 36,000 millimetres or 1 1/4 to 1 3/8 of an inch will have burned in an hour.
The building's load-bearing beams were covered so that after an hour they were not damaged.
Second, to ensure that the building is further protected, active protection was used as well. The code requires that all buildings of this size be equipped with sprinklers, and the number installed was increased by 25 to 30 per cent.
With these two measures, it was proven to the construction board that the safety of the goods and occupants in the building would be safe.
For the construction board, with the new code, the six-storey FondAction building is non-combustible. It is not a combustible building, but a non-combustible building with added combustible elements that do not compromise the safety of the occupants. That difference must be understood.
What type of timber did we use in this project? We used a total of 980 cubic metres of glue-laminated wood. We used 500 cubic metres for the beams and columns and another 480 cubic metres for the decking and floors, which was also glue-laminated wood. I will come back to this type of wood later on.
For the outer ceilings and access walls, we used torrefied wood, basically aspen, which is not normally used in construction. Torrefying the wood makes it considerably less humid, so it can be used in construction. Aspen is not normally cut or salvaged.
The interior layout, the wood frames, doors and wall decking were made of Quebec maple instead of steel.
An interesting element came to light because of the fact that we used wood. We first considered using a concrete frame for this building. If we had done that, it would have taken 1,800 cubic metres of concrete.
According to the software used to calculate the environmental impact of using a certain material instead of another, 600 tons of CO2 would have been emitted into the atmosphere. By using wood, these 600 tons were not emitted. Spruce sequesters 900 tons of CO2 — the quantity of wood that was used in the project — which makes a total of 1,500 tons of sequestered CO2 or the equivalent of 300 cars for a year. This is a significant factor in promoting this type of construction.
FondAction is very focused on sustainable development. This is an element that we want to promote. The building we constructed is LEED. We took a number of measures to ensure that it would be certified and that certification is currently being processed. The project must be fully completed before it can be certified.
There were two building on the grounds. These buildings were demolished and 94 per cent of the debris was gathered and recycled. The soil was contaminated and we decontaminated it. The building envelope was built to work extremely well and energy consumption was reduced by about 40 per cent in comparison to the Model National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings. We reduced the use of potable water by more than 40 per cent as well.
For the occupants, 95 per cent of all the space has an outside view. All of the work spaces have an outside view.
Areas of heat absorption have been reduced. The roof is a white membrane that reflects heat.
There is parking for 22 bicycles with the possibility of installing showers and toilets.
The wood used is FSC certified and low-VOC products were used inside.
The wood used for the beams and the columns, et cetera, is fir and spruce. Nordic Structures de bois, a division of Chantiers Chibougamau, supplied the wood. This company recovers spruce heads from brushwood. These heads are normally left in felling areas and are not used because they are not large enough to make 2 x 3s or 2 x 2s. They recover them to make wood strips that measure 1 x 2 inches. These strips were laminated and used for the beams and columns. This adds value to the salvaged materials. These spruce heads are young fibres that are very dense and have useful structural properties. That is why we are able to use them along with spruce and fir.
We cannot forget that timber is coming from felling areas that are further north. And the trees are smaller and smaller. These trees take a long time to grow. We can avoid waste by recovering these pieces of wood for use in construction.
I was also asked to speak about the difficulties in trying to execute a project like this.
The main problem has to do with the codes. There is a huge lack of information in the codes for designing this type of project. There are very few professionals who are qualified to design this type of structure.
My first attempt was in 2007 with a small four-storey building, a 75,000 square foot office building. The client had hired an engineering firm — which I will not name, obviously — and I asked them about the possibility of using a glue- laminated wood frame. They said it was not possible. I asked why not and they replied that they work with concrete and steel and that they do not know how wood works. Professionals who will agree to think outside the box and work on this type of project are not easy to come by. There are a few, but not many.
In Code O86, the design code for wooden structures, there is no information on the behaviour or fire resistance of wood decking. That does not exist in the code. We used Code O86 from 2001. They are working on 2011, 2009 has been published, but it was not integrated into the 2005 code. There is always a gap of three, four or eight years between what is written in the codes and what is implemented. We are always behind. I have no solution for this problem, but I wanted to mention it.
There is no information in the code about calculating deformations due to wood shrinkage or creep, particularly for fibres. There is no information about that. Concrete's required load-bearing capacity during a fire is clearly defined; it is known how the structure will hold up after an hour. This information does not exist for wood. There is also no method for calculating the capacity of a wooden diaphragm of glue-laminated panels such as we used.
Instead, we used technical reports from the American Wood Council. Information needs to be found elsewhere, including Europe, since they have a lot of information despite the fact that wood is not a significant resource. What is happening in Europe is far more advanced than what is happening here, notably in France, Austria and Scandinavian countries. In Europe, buildings of 8, 9, 10, even 12 storeys are constructed out of wood. That does not happen here.
We have very few timber suppliers for non-commercial buildings here. There are currently three; others may enter the market in the not too distant future.
The dimensional and mechanical properties provided vary with the manufacturer depending on the type of wood used, the method used, et cetera. There are no standards. In residential construction, almost everything is standardized in the Code. The basics are identified — room dimensions, 2 x 4, 2 x 6, 2 x 10, et cetera, are indentified. We know that a given length of a 2 x 12 in spruce can carry a load of X in a specific use. There are no references for commercial construction. Everything needs to be calculated and checked.
When a project is presented to the construction board, with all these grey zones, all of these non-standard elements, they are very open, but they still need to evaluate each individual project. Our project is not a case of jurisprudence; it is a project that they approved. However, another person could come with another project and be rejected, simply because there are no references, no standards. I imagine that there is a lot of subjectivity involved.
The other problem is that there are not many suppliers in this market. It is not common; this is the first time timber has been used for a commercial construction higher than six storeys. There are no other examples of this.
There is plenty of promotion that needs to be done in order to interest producers in supplying these services. Prices vary enormously. In Quebec, for the FondAction project, we asked for tenders and we received three amounts that varied by 30 per cent. The cheapest tender was for timber from British Columbia, laminated in Manitoba, delivered to Quebec. This was 30 per cent cheaper than the Nordic product. What is wrong with this picture?
We considered that maybe it was because Nordic recovers smaller pieces whereas in British Columbia, the pieces are bigger and therefore easier to laminate. They are 2 X 4s or 2 X 6s. Transportation is expensive. And since we had an LEED-certified building, we could not buy products from further than 800 kilometres away. One reason for this is that transportation generates greenhouse gases. It is one of the principles of LEED certification.
FondAction, with its policy of purchasing Quebec products, decided to pay close to 30 per cent more to buy within Quebec and favour the Quebec industry. Thirty per cent more expensive, plus it is another 30 per cent more expensive than a concrete frame. That is another factor that a developer would take into consideration when wondering if wood costs less. No, it does not cost less; it costs more. Currently it costs more. If the industry grows, there is a risk that the price will drop. But right now, it costs far more.
Saying that it costs 25 to 30 per cent more than a concrete frame sounds huge at first, but when you consider that as part of the overall cost of a project, it is 30 per cent more expensive for the concrete frame, which represents between 20 and 25 per cent of the project cost. So, it is about 7 or 8 per cent. But an extra 7 or 8 per cent is still a lot of money for a developer.
These are some of the difficulties encountered during this type of project.
There are currently resources in place. The ministère des ressources naturelles et de la faune has set up a program to offer guidance to professionals, to interest them in this type of construction.
The purpose of the program, run by FPlnnovations, is to maximize the construction of multi-storey, wood-framed buildings in conjunction with the Centre d'expertise sur la construction commerciale en bois, or Cecobois. And, in my opinion, it should really help get other projects off the ground.
After the FondAction project was approved, I do not know if this was a direct consequence or if this was already in the works, but the British Columbia Building Code increased its limits and now allows wood-framed buildings of up to six storeys, but for dwelling units only, not for commercial buildings. One of the goals of the Fonds du Québec project is to eventually see the codes amended and make this project a case of jurisprudence so that progress can be made.
The Chair: I would like to thank you for your presentation, Mr. Huot. We will now invite the senators to ask questions. We will start with Senator Robichaud.
Senator Robichaud: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Huot. It is very interesting to see your accomplishments. If I understand correctly, every project that wishes to use the most timber possible, it is at the acceptance stage, that is, it must be proven to those in construction that the project is up to code.
How long can that take?
Mr. Huot: For FondAction, it took one year. We had two projects. We built plan B, but we also had plan A with a concrete frame. If it had not been approved by Quebec's construction board, we could have gone ahead with the project anyway. But it was a long process. And maybe, in our case, it took a little longer because it was a first.
I imagine that now that the construction board is familiar with the process, it could possibly move more quickly. But I am not in a position to evaluate that.
Senator Robichaud: After your first experience, have there been other buildings of this type that have been built and that took less time in the preparation stage?
Mr. Huot: I know that there are projects in the works, but none have been approved that I know of.
Senator Robichaud: And the approval comes from whom?
Mr. Huot: In Quebec, when I say that there is a delay in approving codes, in Quebec City, when you apply for a permit, they just, a year ago, adopted the 1995 National Building Code.
At that time, the Quebec government approved the 2005 National Building Code. We then asked the city what should be done. They replied that if we designed our building to meet the 2005 code and if Quebec's construction board approved it, they would give us the building permit.
It took a year to get this approval. So in Quebec, it is the construction board who gives this approval.
Senator Robichaud: It was the construction board that incorporated the National Building Code?
Mr. Huot: No, they simply ensured that the professionals correctly followed the national Code for building design.
Senator Robichaud: You talk about professionals. You also said that one problem is the lack of experienced professional who know about wood and its properties.
Mr. Huot: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: Is this improving? Have efforts been made on this front?
Mr. Huot: Significant effort is being made in Quebec at least, mainly by Cecobois, the timber promotion association. I do not know about elsewhere in Canada. In Quebec, they have a website that has a lot of information, work tools, and sample projects. Anyone who is interested can look at this site, which has plenty of information. They will also help professionals in their project, on the technical side as well as with the code, in order to help make the project happen.
Senator Robichaud: You said that there is a lot of technical information available in Europe.
Mr. Huot: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: Is that technical information part of the building code?
Mr. Huot: Good question. I am not sure.
Senator Robichaud: We could get that information.
Mr. Huot: Yes, we could absolutely get it. There is information available, because projects are being done. I have seen some very interesting and extremely advanced projects that we do not see at all here.
And yet wood is not a resource there, but there is a lot of information out there.
Senator Robichaud: Have they managed to reduce prices to be comparable to concrete constructions here?
Mr. Huot: Not yet.
Senator Robichaud: So there is still a margin?
Mr. Huot: Yes. As I said, before the FondAction project, there was absolutely no market in the commercial building sector. This is the first, and if there are more, we will possibly see competition.
For example, Groupe Canam Manac inc., which manufactures steel joists, is on the verge of creating a department to do wood decking. That is something new. Perhaps other companies will follow; I do not know.
[English]
Senator Ogilvie: I have two quick-answer questions and one with a bit of an explanation.
[Translation]
In Europe, the regulations allow for seven-storey, non-residential buildings. What height is allowed for the residential sector in Europe?
Mr. Huot: In Scandinavia, England and Germany, there are projects that are nine and ten storeys. In Austria or Germany — I cannot remember which one — there are plans on the drawing board for 20-storey wood structures. Technically, we can go a long way with wood. It is true that there are problems with shrinking and creep.
In Quebec City, for example, we know that the structure will be subsidence of 13.2 centimetres over six floors. When we attach a curtain wall to the structure, we must have expansion joints on each floor to allow for this subsidence in the building. We have been measuring the building's progressive subsidence for three or four months, and the parameters we obtained were right on.
[English]
Senator Ogilvie: Are you familiar with the Hotel del Coronado, near San Diego?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: Yes, I have visited it.
[English]
Senator Ogilvie: It is quite a structure; it has been around for quite a while. Do you know whether it is a post-and- beam construction?
Mr. Huot: No, I am sorry, I do not.
[Translation]
Senator Ogilvie: You have touched some very important points, but to make sure that I have understood, I will focus my questions on these points.
[English]
We have heard, and you have touched on this subject, that under the stress of fire and severe heat laminated wood has a tendency to separate at the laminate, exposing glues. These glues are highly flammable organics. The separation increases the surface area of the wood, which obviously causes fires to occur more rapidly. Could you comment a bit more on that aspect of laminates?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: There is no mention in the code of fire resistance. The only mention is 45 minutes. Beyond 45 minutes, we would have to extrapolate regulations from the technical reports of the American Wood Council. So we extrapolated and gave ourselves a safety margin. If ever there were a fire, part of the decking could burn without compromising the structural integrity of the floor. I do not think that the glues currently being used are flammable. They are latex-based glues and do not contain any volatile components. That problem has been resolved.
[English]
Senator Ogilvie: My final question on stability relates to the issue of physical stress. Quebec is a region with some seismic activity. I assume there are aspects in the codes that deal with this activity. How does wood compare to steel within the code requirements relating to the level of seismic activity?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: I will use Quebec City as an example, because it is the only one that I know. We used concrete stairs and elevator shafts to absorb any seismic activity for the building. In fact, we created a hybrid system. We could have made them out of wood, but since there were too many unknowns, we used concrete to absorb seismic activity.
We also used the decking to counter potential twisting of the building in case of seismic activity. There is not a lot of data out there, so we do not know how it handles this. That is why we went with a hybrid system with concrete stairs and elevator shafts, and we attached the structure to the shafts.
Senator Ogilvie: Thank you for your presentation.
The Chair: I must say that Senator Ogilvie is very good in his second language.
[English]
Senator Mercer: To follow up on my fellow Nova Scotian's question, in your answer you said that in Scandinavia, England and Germany there are buildings of nine or 10 storeys. Were they built with cross-laminated lumber?
Mr. Huot: No.
Senator Mercer: If they are built with cross-laminated lumber, is there a difference in the assembly of the cross- laminated lumber that you used in Quebec City and, in particular, is there an analysis of the use of glues and what kind of glue is being used in each cross-lamination?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: In Quebec City, the decking is not cross laminated. It is laminated in a single direction, in the direction of the fibres. We used cross laminated panels only in the main entrance. It is a cross laminated wood canopy. This was a trial, because in Quebec, cross laminated lumber does not exist.
Nordic built us this cross laminated canopy because, in principle, since the fibres work in two directions, it should be much sturdier than lumber laminated in a single direction. We had no data. As I was saying, in Canada, there is no data. We could possibly look to Europe for more information, but I have not had the chance to do so.
[English]
Senator Mercer: Regarding the one-year approval process, if you had not wanted to use wood in the Quebec City environment, what would have been the normal approval process?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: That depends on the municipality. The time periods are very short — one or two months. When we build something out of concrete or steel, this type of assembly is familiar. We know how they work mechanically, we are familiar with their resistance to fire, all of that is known.
Glulam wood is referred to as an assembly. To be entered into the code, it must be tested. For that to happen, a number of different types of tests must be conducted in a laboratory. Government agencies must order these tests, the National Research Council, or someone else. That costs money; it takes an investment to move forward. If these assemblies were known and integrated into the code, the time period would certainly be shorter.
Senator Robichaud: Could you explain what is cross laminated lumber to me and the others?
Mr. Huot: For beams that served as columns, we use stickers that are one by two inches. They are all assembled parallel to the fibres. The fibres go in a single direction, and we assemble it. For cross laminated lumber, we make a row in one direction, then a row in the other. It is the same principle as plywood. The fibres go in two directions. It gives more stiffness.
[English]
Senator Mercer: To complete my question on the approval time, you say it would normally take one or two months to get approval in most municipalities. It took one year to get this one approved. Can we assume that if you were to go back and wanted to do another similar building in the same municipality that the approval time would be much shorter than it was the first time?
Mr. Huot: I do not know.
[Translation]
The Régie du bâtiment du Québec will analyze that on a case-by-case basis. It depends on the dimensions of the building, the number of storeys, the distances involved, any combustible elements that will be introduced; there is no rule right now. The Régie du bâtiment du Québec looks at things on a case-by-case basis. I cannot take a guess; I just hope that it would go faster if I went to them with another project. They know that I have experience with the first project, but in someone else's case, I do not know. I have no idea.
Senator Eaton: What would you recommend to promote wood construction across Canada? We heard from witnesses earlier this week, who represented steel manufacturers in Canada. Ms. Sylvie Boulanger from Montreal testified that they were going into schools, universities; they were sponsoring construction courses for concrete, but especially steel. If you could make recommendations, how could we practically encourage wood construction?
Mr. Huot: We must provide training programs. Professional associations in Quebec are all required to have ongoing training. The Ordre des architectes du Québec already put on an initial ongoing training course in architecture, which I attended.
Senator Eaton: Are there courses specifically for wood construction for architects?
Mr. Huot: In architecture school, no. We must understand that in the residential sector, all of the elements to put together a project are known. We take the code, look at the elements and put them together; it is strictly a matter of imagination. But in the commercial sector, there is no training when it comes to knowledge of the mechanics of wood.
Senator Eaton: So it is a lack of education; the prejudices are there because of a lack of education.
Mr. Huot: I think that the professional associations should intervene. The universities as well must eventually provide this training to professionals. It is a matter of training. So, talking about learning something for reasons that do not exist — I must point out that this information does not exist right now. But if we truly want to promote wood and its use in commercial buildings, we must promote it, and that involves training. We must have laboratories test wood, we must release that information and integrate it into the codes.
Senator Eaton: Those are all things that the steel manufacturers are doing.
Mr. Huot: Yes, it is the same idea; it is no different. It is just a different material.
Senator Eaton: Another question: in Quebec, our tradition of construction and architecture comes from France. In France, walls are often not built with plaster, but are built of painted wood. But that tradition is not followed in Quebec. What are the benefits of plaster walls over painted wood walls, if any?
Mr. Huot: It is cheaper. It is all about markets. It is cheaper to put in a piece of drywall than a piece of wood. A sheet of cherry or maple plywood is infinitely more expensive than a sheet of drywall. It is strictly a matter of economics.
Senator Eaton: It is ironic, when you think that our country has the most forests in the world.
Mr. Huot: I worked for seven years in the Middle East, in Dubai, building buildings out of stainless steel, aluminum and glass, in the middle of the desert, at 50oC. We did not use any local resources. It is an aberration to do projects like that. Every time I returned to Quebec, when you arrive in Canada, you arrive through Labrador: that area is green; they have wood. And all we manage to do with wood is produce 2 x 3s, 2 x 4s, wood chips and pulp and paper. I would think we could do other things with it.
Senator Eaton: It is rather ironic.
Mr. Huot: Paradoxically, here, compared to Dubai, we continue to build in concrete, steel, stainless steel, aluminum and glass. And that resource, we use very little. You are preaching to the choir here.
Senator Eaton: We will change that. Thank you.
[English]
Senator Plett: Thank you for your marvellous presentation. I was one of the few people fortunate enough to visit your lovely building in Quebec. I enjoyed it very much. Thank you for the tour that you gave us.
It seems that we have three problems with wood. The first problem is cost. Many of my contractor friends tell me that if the cost came down, everyone would build with wood, but as long as private money is being used, private investors will go with what is most economical.
The second problem is the lack of education, to which Senator Eaton referred, and the third problem is the lack of visionaries who decide to do something a bit out of the ordinary. Again, I commend you on your vision and initiative.
I want to touch on the cost. We heard a witness a few months ago who spoke about building an arena in Abbotsford. The contractor who did the work was not from British Columbia and saved the people of Abbotsford $600,000.
You suggested that if you had bought your lumber in Manitoba, and I think you may have said B.C. as well, you would have saved upwards of 30 per cent. If you had done that, how close would you have come to the price of concrete or steel if you had simply taken the lowest bidder?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: A concrete structure in a building of that size, about 60,000 square feet, costs from $26 to $28 per square foot. Our preliminary estimates for a wood structure, if supplies came from British Columbia, would cost around $28 to $29 per square foot. That is not a huge difference, but if there were more competition and projects on the market, the price could drop below concrete.
[English]
Senator Plett: Had you taken the Manitoba price, would you have been close to the price for concrete?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: It would have been similar, around $2 to $3 per gross square foot of construction. The investment in wood for the FondAction project is a total of $14.5 million, including the indoor parking.
For the wood structure, decking, exterior wood siding, it was an investment of $2.3 million. If our wood had been supplied from British Columbia, we could have probably saved $300,000 on the project, for final savings of $5 per square foot for the structure.
[English]
Senator Plett: Out of curiosity, did the building come in more or less on the tendered budget, now that you are nearly complete?
Mr. Huot: No.
Senator Duffy: That would be a real first.
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: They say that a good architect is someone who goes over budget, does not respect deadlines and puts in a leaky roof.
[English]
Senator Plett: I want to discuss the idea of education and/or the possibly of creating more visionaries.
What is the answer to get more people interested? Architects and engineers have spoken to us saying that people coming out of the universities — I do not know that they necessarily called them lazy — simply want to get into the market and start making money. That is one problem.
What do you think we could do to get people more interested? Is it government interaction wherein the government states a certain percentage of their buildings have to be built in wood or is it universities simply taking the initiative?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: Governments have a very important role to play. If we want to promote this industry, it cannot be on a voluntary basis; we must impose long-term regulations.
A government project, at the federal, provincial or municipal level, must include x per cent of wood. They did it, for example, with the Orchestre symphonique de Montréal. The Government of Quebec required that the interior be made of wood, in order to promote the resource. That is the direction we must take. We know that it will cost a bit more, but the governments must be involved in setting x per cent of wood in projects. That is the best way to promote it. As soon as it is required, professionals will look for the necessary information to get it done. Otherwise, they will not be qualified to do those types of projects.
It is possible. Then, we must promote this material for commercial uses as part of university training. How do we do that? I do not know.
[English]
Senator Plett: People at the National Research Council of Canada responsible for the National Building Code seem to be waiting for industry and provinces to press for changes in the code. Are provinces and/or industry pressing for these changes?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: Currently in Quebec, yes, because the government decided to establish a policy to promote wood. So there are people who are interested in becoming suppliers of this material. To have their products certified, they will have to have laboratories test assemblies, et cetera. It can be done by the National Research Council or by private laboratories; it can be done in many places or in such a way that once the tests are conducted, they can be introduced into the provincial building codes or the National Building Code.
[English]
Senator Duffy: Mr. Huot, cost is obviously a factor in all of these projects. You told us about various aspects of the costs in your magnificent building in Quebec City. What about insurance? We have had a debate. People representing the steel industry were here the other day. They are concerned about fire. What has your client found his insurer has done in terms of cost related to your structure in Quebec?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: For the Quebec City project, the FondAction insurers did not say anything, because as soon as the building was approved by the Régie du bâtiment du Québec, it was in line with the building code. Whether it is wood or concrete, it does not matter for insurance. For example, automatic sprinklers are required, whether we are talking about wood or concrete, and it must be in line with certain specific standards.
This question was brought up in the case of the Quebec City project, about whether insurance companies would react, but we did not get a reaction from them. The building is insured.
Senator Duffy: The cost is the same, for concrete, steel or wood?
Mr. Huot: Yes.
[English]
Senator Duffy: You advocate that governments mandate the use of wood in the construction of public buildings. How much assistance will there be? You tell us about a year-long approval process. Surely, one thing government could do almost immediately is speed up the approval process so people would not face this type of barrier.
Mr. Huot: True.
Senator Duffy: Did the regulators give you a reason why it took a year? Were they reinventing the wheel every day?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: Almost. In the National Building Code, there is very little information available and there are no standards, unlike with residential wood construction, for which there are standards, such as species of wood identified, et cetera.
Once you are in accordance with the standards in the code, approval is purely circumstantial. You submit your plans, and depending on how busy the municipality or city is, the plan is approved and the permit is issued in a very reasonable period of time.
The problem we had was that before getting the building permit from the Ville de Québec, we had to go through the Régie du bâtiment. It is on a case-by-case basis. There was no precedent. This building was a first in North America. Public servants are very often cautious. They want to make sure everything is correct.
Senator Duffy: Unbelievable.
Mr. Huot: It is up to you, not them, to show that you are right; that safety is not compromised.
The challenge is that just because we are introducing combustible elements into a building that must be non- combustible does not mean that we are jeopardizing safety. The only thing that matters in a building is the safety of individuals; nothing else matters. When that is assured, everything is fine.
[English]
Senator Duffy: It seems to me that the starting point for this should be in the universities, where they train architects.
Mr. Huot: They train structural engineers as well.
Senator Duffy: Yes, I include that entire cohort. The bureaucrats will then realize there is a body of expertise and that these ideas and concepts have been tested and found to be effective.
Finally, on the question of promotion, instead of government decree, it seems to me that the obvious aesthetic and environmental positives of buildings made from wood would have great appeal, especially to the younger generation and to more creative young people wanting to get into the field of architecture and engineering.
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: The new generation of professionals is much more aware of climate change than my generation. In a building like FondAction, we avoid releasing 1,500 tons of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere, which is the equivalent of 300 cars running for one year. If we multiply this type of project by 100, that adds up to a lot of cars and a huge decrease in greenhouse gas emissions.
[English]
Senator Duffy: Finally, if you buy close to home, it is not protectionism; it is avoiding the carbon footprint required in all that long-haul transportation of the products. That is also an environmental concern as opposed to interprovincial protectionism.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: Mr. Huot, you are from Montreal, correct?
Mr. Huot: Yes, I am from Montreal.
Senator Rivard: Is this the first major project you have done in Quebec City?
Mr. Huot: Yes.
Senator Rivard: I would like to explain a bit about the special circumstances in Quebec City, where I spent most of my life, and where I had the pleasure of being a businessman in the mechanical sector for 35 years. The historic downtown, Vieux-Québec, was recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
This means that there are a number of hurdles to overcome before you can do anything. It starts with submitting a plan. Public servants examine it and refer it to an urban planning committee, which is composed of elected officials and expert citizens, with knowledge of urban planning. Then, it must be approved by Quebec's department of culture. It then returns to the Ville de Québec. So, a project that might have taken three months in Lévis, a city next to Quebec City, could take nearly a year. That gives you an idea of the special circumstances in Quebec City. The current mayor, Mr. Labeaume, has promised to cut that amount of time so that projects can move more quickly.
Quebec City also had an earthquake, to answer Senator Ogilvie's question, on November 25, 1988, that reached over 6.0 on the Richter scale, which is comparable to the earthquake in Haiti. Aside from broken windows and dishes, the damage was minimal, and that includes structures built of steel, and single-family homes built of wood.
You said that with a $14.5 million project, $2.3 million was reserved for wood, and without competition, it could have cost 30 per cent less, but if competition had been the only criterion, you would have taken wood from British Columbia. However, if we were to compare steel and concrete, we could save 30 per cent on the cost of materials.
Last fall, we heard testimony from the dean of the faculty of forestry at the Université Laval. We had the privilege of seeing the pavilion built entirely of wood. He said that when we invest, we do it once, but we must take into consideration the other recurring costs, such as heating. He spoke about annual savings in heating of around 25 per cent to 30 per cent compared to a conventional structure in concrete or steel. Can we say that despite the extra amount invested in the wood structure, thanks to the savings in heating, for example, this difference in price could be recovered in seven to eight years, similar to how people are using geothermics instead of conventional air conditioning?
Mr. Huot: That is an excellent point. You are absolutely right. In a wood structure, thermal bridges do not exist, or almost never exist. A steel or concrete structure must be insulated against cold or heat on the exterior. That is expensive. But they can never be 100 per cent insulated.
Wood has very interesting thermal insulation properties. Over the long term, you are talking about the Kruger pavilion, I am not surprised to see those kinds of energy savings.
With time and use, in the FondAction building, we will be able to verify that. I must say that we developed a high- performance envelope for the building. The thermal resistance of the exterior walls is R-30, and the roof is R-40. That is huge.
We will see, after three or four years, in looking at the electricity bills, but the simulations show savings of around 40 per cent, compared to the Model National Energy Code.
Senator Rivard: That is excellent.
Mr. Huot: It is something definitely worth nothing. When a promoter wants to look at this option, it is important to mention that there is a possibility. We do not yet know; it must still be verified, but there is enormous potential for energy savings.
Senator Rivard: The university experienced it, and the dean was there when we visited. I could not believe the huge energy savings.
When we visited your building under construction, we were at Université Laval and we finished the day at the new Chauveau indoor soccer centre.
Those who worked on the construction warned us; they loved the building, but told us that if construction were to all of a sudden pick up, it would be hard in Quebec City to have two projects like yours at the same time, because of labour. It is a different set of skills, and the only supplier in the industry, Chantiers Chibougamau, could perhaps not supply the projects.
Mr. Huot: It is not able to right now.
Senator Rivard: It could not do it, and we must take that into consideration. Supply and demand absolutely come into play here. The more that employees do it, the more skilled they will be, and others will be able to learn.
On Tuesday we spoke with people from the steel industry; we must always educate people. Wood costs more to purchase and install, but over time, because of very significant energy savings, we must not think only about the purchase price, but also a price over 10 or 15 years.
I hope that you will have other projects in this area.
Mr. Huot: Thank you.
The Chair: Do you have any comments to make about Senator Rivard's statement?
Mr. Huot: What Senator Rivard said about the timeframe in Quebec City is very true. The urban planning commission in Quebec City makes decisions; it does not consult. If the urban planning commission had said no to the project, there is no way to appeal in Quebec City. The commission was formed by the Quebec government because it is the provincial capital. There are seven architects who sit on the Quebec City commission. They are from Quebec City. When you are from Montreal and you go to present a plan, you are told, "Why an architect from Montreal? Was there no one from Quebec City to do it?".
Senator Rivard: That is why I asked if you were from Montreal.
Senator Robichaud: To follow up on Senator Rivard's comments that we could not meet demand, you said that the wood supplier used is not currently keeping up. That means there is a demand.
Mr. Huot: Yes, there are a number of projects in the making. A number have come out recently, and I know that they are having a hard time supplying. I could get more information on the project.
Senator Robichaud: But demand is increasing regardless?
Mr. Huot: There is a strong trend towards planning, it is becoming more popular to do wood projects because of the Quebec government decree, stating that they will favour the use of wood in all public government buildings. If that was done at the federal level, it would help.
As soon as there is demand, people will be interested in supplying the materials. In Quebec, there is one. I learned that Groupe Canam Manac inc., a manufacturer of steel joists, is seriously examining the possibility of creating a wood joist department. The demand is there. The resource is there; we are not lacking. It must be well managed, but it is there.
Furthermore, now, we cannot sell our products on the American market. That is a huge factor. It can influence demand. We must find markets for our resource in Quebec and Canada. Since the American market is closed, or very difficult to access, we must figure something out on our own.
Senator Robichaud: That forces us to find other ways to use our resource.
In your plan, you spoke about sustainable development. How much weight does that factor carry over the use of wood in the design process of your building?
Mr Huot: We must remember that FondAction represents people who are interested in sustainable development, that is part of the business's culture. As soon as they say, "we are doing a LEED certified green project," that they will be helping reduce greenhouse gasses, they are ready to get involved and put a dollar figure on that.
Senator Robichaud: So it is really something that should be considered in the future, correct? We are talking about climate change.
Mr. Huot: The sequestration capacity of wood is permanent. Once it is integrated into a construction, it is there for the life of the building, that is what is saved, instead of burning it or creating biomass.
Senator Robichaud: Or letting it rot.
Mr. Huot: And the gasses are released long term; if we can use it and sequester it permanently, it is better.
Senator Robichaud: Back home, in Richibouctou, there is a roof truss manufacturer. When I went to visit them, they did a demonstration, to show how design for trusses works, it was all on computer. So, depending on the house, crisscrossed roofs, superimposed roofs, were not a problem; they entered the information on a computer.
I asked them who supplied the program, wood suppliers? They told me no, that manufacturers of steel nail plates provide the program. It has nothing to do with wood. They want to sell their product, so they found a way to use it in construction.
Mr. Huot: The performance of wood elements and plates is known, to keep all these elements in place, it must be calculated.
Senator Robichaud: The steel industry provided the program; it has nothing to do with wood. I would have thought the wood industry would have provided the computer programs, but it was the steel plate industry.
Mr. Huot: The need is there.
Senator Robichaud: There are also open wood joists that are being used more and more.
Mr. Huot: That are open web.
Senator Robichaud: Yes, there has certainly been some research.
Mr. Huot: It is known; we have seen all the manuals for different types of open web joists with spans, et cetera, these are known, the anchoring plates, there are no problems with that.
It is when we use glulam wood or other wood assemblies that we encounter problems.
Even if the open web joists are ten feet high, as soon as they are put into a commercial building over four storeys, it becomes a problem.
Senator Robichaud: Okay.
Mr. Huot: We must show that if we use these things, we are not endangering users. It is always the same problem that comes up. These elements are known. But we still need to show it. We must prove that it is good.
Senator Eaton: I unfortunately have not had the opportunity to travel with Senator Plett and Senator Mercer to see your building. How old is your building now?
Mr. Huot: It is very young; it is not completed. It is almost nine months old, and will officially be opened on May 11.
Senator Eaton: Have you noticed or observed any unpredicted weather-related damage as of yet?
Mr. Huot: We have noted some minor damage. We were lucky, because the structure was put up during the winter, but it was not a difficult winter. We did not have any major snow storms. Part of the decking was flooded by a storm at one point. Just part of it. The decking moved. That is normal.
When the wood arrived at the worksite, there was less than 13 per cent humidity. If you get water on it, it loses its capacities, then, the time it takes to dry out, it warps. That is minor.
As for the structure, that did not jeopardize the project. It was really minor. We had to plane and sand the floors to level them, but that is minor.
Also, since we are using fir and spruce, even if the wood is dry, it always moves. It cracks, but that is not. . . aesthetically, wood is wood, we do not expect the material to act like a concrete column. Cracks are part of the look of the material.
Senator Eaton: Because it is a first in North America, with a height of 22 metres, has the building drawn interest in Canada or the United States?
Mr. Huot: About a month and a half ago, a group of seven architects visited the building. Three months ago, we had a visit by a group of architects from Scandinavia. The project is being talked about.
Senator Eaton: It is creating waves.
Mr. Huot: It is creating waves. People in Europe are interested — they came to visit us — and people from the United States.
It is still a work in progress. We have requests for visits very regularly, from architecture schools, university professors.
Senator Eaton: Is the interest based on the fact that this is a green project?
Mr. Huot: Primarily, yes. An ecological product.
[English]
Senator Plett: I have a few short and basic questions continuing with cross laminates.
Are all glulam beams cross-laminated?
Mr. Huot: No.
Senator Plett: Could you explain the difference? Are they both engineered?
Mr. Huot: They are both engineered wood.
[Translation]
The fibres of glulam can only go in a single direction. That is a purely technical issue. The fibres in compression wood have excellent properties. The building's columns were built from a single piece on two floors, in order to have the lowest subsidence rate possible. There are three sections of two floors for the columns, which gives us a subsidence of 13.2 centimetres. Since the fibres are compressed, the lamination is done in a single direction, in the direction of the fibres.
If we did that with cross laminated lumber, I am not sure that we would have the same result. Since we would have 50 per cent of the fibres parallel to the compression and 50 per cent in the other direction. I am not sure it would be as good.
However, when we use a horizontal diaphragm, it has some interesting properties.
[English]
Senator Plett: Does the building stand on concrete piers, woodpiles or have you dug down to bedrock?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: We have three basement levels. We built Berlin walls. We poured concrete foundations. When we started building, it was always a concrete structure, when we started the foundation. The foundation is designed to support a concrete structure.
It is not impossible, but it would be hard to do three levels underground out of wood. We did not look at that option. In my opinion, it would not be appropriate because of the humidity. The water table in the ground was extremely high.
There was significant active pressure, because the building bordered land on three sides, plus the neighbouring land on the other side. We had to do some underpinning work to adequately support the neighbouring building. With wood, you are just asking for problems. The decision was made to work with concrete. Everything above ground is in wood.
[English]
Senator Plett: You suggest in your presentation that not enough information is available regarding how well a wood building will stand up to all the difficulties we may have with climate, et cetera. Does that concern you in any way at this point or do you feel that this is a building that can stand for 100 years as with many other wood buildings?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: I had the opportunity to work with a structural engineer who did not have a large organization. He was prepared to work on research to find the necessary parameters to design the structure of this building. In that sense, it worked very well.
As I said, we built some cushions into the structure design. If we had only calculated the minimum dimensions for the structure, it would still have worked, but we added an additional hour of cushion for fire. That is what we submitted to the Régie. We did not take any chances, we added an extra hour. The code requires an hour, but we added an extra one. So in case of fire, the structure will not collapse. The structural integrity of the building will be consistent. If there is a three-hour fire, no building would survive.
[English]
Senator Plett: Last week, we had a fire chief here who expressed some concern about the flammability of glues in engineered wood products. He said that everything can be counteracted and made safe by installing a sprinkler system, but he had concerns about the flammability of the glues. What is your response to that concern?
[Translation]
Mr. Huot: I would have to check. That already came up when I visited the Nordic factory in Chibougamau. The glues they use now are inflammable. These are water-based glues; they are no longer solvent based. This problem is resolved, I believe. I would perhaps have to look into that and send you that information.
[English]
Senator Plett: Thank you. I would appreciate that.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: I understand that the technical data is available, or at least some is, in Europe, is that correct?
Mr. Huot: In Europe and the United States.
Senator Robichaud: What would you suggest our committee do to encourage those responsible for the code to consider this technical data and to integrate it into our code?
Mr. Huot: You would probably have to mandate someone to collect the information. The information exists; it is a matter of looking for it and transmitting it to people who make amendments and update the code. The information is available.
In the United States, there is a lot of information. The American Wood Council has a huge amount of information. We do not use it here, but the information is available. It is a matter of telling someone to look for it, collect it and transmit it to the authorities who make amendments to the code. The information is there. There is a lot of it.
We would still have to test the assemblies in a laboratory, the National Research Council or another one, to integrate them into the code, but a lot of information is available. Unfortunately no one has been looking.
Senator Robichaud: There are no engineering firms who would be interested in looking for that information? The demand is not there?
Mr. Huot: No engineering firms have been mandated to look for it. If the projects are there, if there are means to carry them out, the professionals working on them will look for the information. They will not hesitate. There is also that aspect. To do the FondAction project, we went looking for information.
Senator Robichaud: But you do not have it with you.
Mr. Huot: For the time being, yes. I will send it to you soon.
The Chair: Mr. Huot, before closing the meeting, I would like to thank you for all the information. You were very professional, and since yours is the only building in North America, I want to congratulate you. I have a few questions before we adjourn, and we would like to benefit from your experience, you are the first, and would like to communicate with you via mail to ask more specific questions. Would you be prepared to share with us?
Mr. Huot: With pleasure.
The Chair: The wood used currently is spruce and fir.
Mr. Huot: Yes.
The Chair: You spoke about aspen and another wood species in our forest, from east to west, larch.
Senator Robichaud: We call it "violon" where I come from.
The Chair: Where I come from, we call it red spruce. When we talk about torrefied wood in the construction industry, if we could work with the amount of larch and aspen we have in our forests to torrefy it to be used in non- residential construction, it would be an incredible market. What do you think about that?
Mr. Huot: Torrefied wood is a French technology. The wood is put in a kiln for a period of time. It is torrefied for a period of time. All of the humidity is taken out of the wood. It gets down to less than 13 per cent. This technology stabilizes the wood fibres. It can be used on the interior or exterior.
In Quebec City, we did an experiment. We took Perdure wood and made exterior ceilings, soffits, out of Perdure wood, and, if you look at the photos, we put an access wall up to the roof out of Perdure wood. Over time, we will see how this wood reacts outside. On the inside, it is going very well. The wood is very stable. It is greying a bit with time, it is taking on an interesting patina. Outside, it is not very worn yet. We will see the results over time.
I think that it is an interesting product and an interesting market, since we use wood that would not normally be used in construction. Aspen and larch, unless you are building a frame structure, it moves a lot.
The Chair: By torrefying it, or using Perdure technology on aspen, we are giving it another use.
Mr. Huot: Yes, another use.
The Chair: I have a question about pine from western Canada. If we were to use the same Perdure technology on Canadian pine, could we not also use it inside for non-residential construction?
Mr. Huot: I would imagine so. The technology could be applied. I am not an expert on Perdure wood. I imagine that we could use any species.
The Chair: If we wanted to use more of the Perdure technology, are there currently companies that exist in Canada?
Mr. Huot: Yes, in Quebec. I could give you the names of those who do it.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Huot.
Mr. Huot: My pleasure.
The Chair: Thank you for being here. We will send you the first interim report on the Canadian forest sector, past, present, future, with the new mandate. The new mandate, which was the reason for your visit today, is to examine and promote the development and marketing of value-added and also hybrid wood products, and to look at possible changes to the 2005 National Building Code of Canada.
This has never been seen before, in light of the current situation with the forestry industry in North America and the world, we will have the players and stakeholders at all levels — either in training, education and environment or those who encourage value-added products — at the same table to allow municipal, provincial and federal governments to put in place mechanisms for the use of wood that are better for the environment, sustainable development and also job creation.
Before we thank you, do you have any final comments?
Mr. Huot: No. Thank you very much for your invitation. It was a pleasure being here and thank you for your interest in our project.
[English]
The Chair: On behalf of the committee, I sincerely thank you, Mr. Huot, for your professionalism and the information that you have shared with this committee.
(The committee adjourned.)