Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry
Issue 2 - Evidence - Meeting of April 13, 2010
OTTAWA, Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met this day at 5:35 p.m. to examine the current state and future of Canada's forest sector.
Senator Percy Mockler (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: I see that we have a quorum and I would therefore like to call this meeting to order.
[English]
I welcome you again to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
[Translation]
Mr. Bourassa, we would like to welcome you to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. We will proceed immediately with the introduction of our committee members.
My name is Percy Mockler and I am a senator from New Brunswick and the chair of the committee.
[English]
At this point, honourable senators, I would like to start by asking the senators to introduce themselves.
Senator Mercer: I am Terry Mercer from Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: Fernand Robichaud from New Brunswick.
[English]
Senator Fairbairn: Joyce Fairbairn, from Lethbridge, Alberta.
[Translation]
Senator Eaton: Nicole Eaton from Ontario.
Senator Segal: Hugh Segal from Ontario.
[English]
Senator Martin: Yonah Martin, British Columbia.
Senator Wallin: Pamela Wallin, Saskatchewan.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: Michel Rivard from Quebec.
The Chair: I would ask the last senator to introduce himself.
[English]
Senator Duffy: Mike Duffy, Prince Edward Island.
The Chair: The committee is continuing its study on the current state and future of Canada's forest sector.
[Translation]
Today, we welcome a witness who appeared before the committee last fall. I would like to take this opportunity to thank him for having agreed once again to appear before the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry in order to make a special presentation on a mission in which he participated.
[English]
Mr. Bourassa accepted our invitation to come back and make a special presentation about a fact-finding mission in which he has participated, and today we again have the honour of listening to you for another special presentation that will be about innovative practices of green buildings in Europe.
[Translation]
Mr. Bourassa is the president of the Ordre des architectes du Québec.
[English]
The presentation will last approximately one hour and then we will go to questions. I would now invite Mr. Bourassa to take the floor.
[Translation]
André Bourassa, Architect and President, Ordre des architectes du Québec: Thank you, senators, for inviting me here.
[English]
One more time, I apologize for not being fluent enough in English to make the presentation in English. One advantage is to be slower in my presentation, but without patience on my part, so I will make the presentation, with your permission, in French at this moment, and I hope the interpreters and stenographers can follow me.
[Translation]
First of all, I am going to provide you with the background for this technical mission. This technical mission was organized by the Ordre des architectes du Québec in cooperation with Hydro-Québec, a crown corporation which is struggling, I must say, to ensure that Quebec's energy efficiency meets both the expectations of the construction sector and Hydro-Québec.
Clearly, we still need examples of best practices and that is what I am going to be demonstrating to you today. I am also going to point out the relationship between energy efficiency and ecology and, as it so happens, wood use, which ties into the terms of reference of your committee.
This mission is taking place in Switzerland and Austria, because this is where we find the most innovative practices, particularly in Vorarlberg, which was one of Austria's poorest regions and had been abandoned by building designers. When the young architects decided to go back to Vorarlberg, it was because they wanted to design a new type of architecture, where wood and the ecology would be given priority.
This is what I am going to be talking to you about. My presentation includes some photos as well as some graphs which may be a bit dry, but you will accept my apologies for that. However, I do think that it is worthwhile to go through all of this, particularly to view the photos to have an idea about this new wood architecture.
Representatives from around the world are participating in this mission. Obviously, there are differences between the architecture found in British Columbia and that in New Brunswick, in terms of wood use; the trees are not the same size, and that is normal. And we will also see something which, I think, will be very interesting to you.
I have given many conferences across Quebec on the topic of wood use and have come to realize just how much this material is becoming an extremely attractive component that is both revitalizing and empowering the regions. Wood brings both economic development and the highest possible added value.
Obviously, this is also an opportunity for the regions and large centres to make more with less, namely, to design buildings more efficiently using less energy. Do we need to point out that it takes much less energy to build something out of wood than any other material?
But in addition to the environmentally-friendly characteristics, wood also enables us to strive for greater quality, for new architectural features, always seen from the perspective of quality architecture beneficial to all. We cannot be competitive in Canada, we cannot attract foreign research to come to Canada if we house them in bunkers. We have to provide attractive housing because this is what is done on the international scene, we are really talking about renewed environments. And I think that it is important to remember this.
Another important thing that we are seeing more and more is that this desire to promote wood is doing a lot to help the wood processing sector, which is an important economic sector in Canada. Unfortunately, we are also witnessing a certain amount of push-back from the steel and concrete and aluminum sectors.
The Ordre des architectes has a very important motto and it is this: each material has its place. When we talk about wood, we are talking about appropriate places for wood, and when we talk about other materials, the same thing applies.
You will see that, in this Swiss-Austrian mission, wood has been used a great deal on the outside, and it is being allowed to age on the outside in a way that is very different from what we would do here. I am not trying to tell you that this is the only way to do things, but this is one way to go about it. This is one out of many other ways of working with the material, in rural architecture, in the very contemporary architecture that we can also have. There are all kinds of styles that can live side-by-side in a very good way. I like to say, when I am doing an architectural project for my clients, that this is not my project that I am doing, but rather theirs, into which I am putting my knowledge and imagination. It is for this reason that I cannot say, here in Canada, that there is only one architecture signature because I do not have only one client model. This is very important, and even more so for the 10,000 architects here in Canada.
I started off by showing you this tiny photo of a rather commonplace employee room with an overly ambitious use of wood. It is made all of wood. In all honesty, there is a bit too much for my taste.
I would also like to talk to you about a global headquarters for a multinational company that runs rest areas with health restaurants in Switzerland, in Asia and in many other countries of the world, and which told us that they did not want to have a headquarters like those from the mid 1970s, they wanted to have headquarters with a very, very, very high environmentally-added value. And that is what we will be talking about in the next hour.
I am going to quickly show you a few photos of this wood, and afterwards we will discuss the mission report per se, as it was prepared. I should point out that in this technical mission, there were 25 architects from Quebec, and every one paid for his or her hotel, plane ticket, expenses, rest assured of that. None of this was paid for by Hydro-Québec, the Ordre des architectes or the government. Hydro-Québec did, however, make a sizable financial contribution for the organization of the mission so that the consultants were well prepared.
I will take you to another picture of wood, exterior cladding using very ordinary boards. You will notice the absence of framing around the windows. Personally, I would never do that. But this is another way of seeing things. There are oxidized metal window sills. This is also another perspective.
It is a museum: you can see how the wood is aging. The tower was built using concrete and the museum ages in this way. Inside this same museum, there is a mixture of wood, steel and aluminum. Inside this same museum, we see wood floors, wooden ceilings, without treatment or paint. Here, you see a cultural centre where, once again, wood figures prominently. The sort of pergola that you see on top, that in fact would be the photovoltaic solar collectors, that is to say the unit that creates electricity, while still allowing the daylight in. This creates a sort of exterior agora for the cultural centre. Once again, I am not trying to suggest that it would be of the greatest urgency to manufacture electricity in this way in Canada. I am just telling you that there are many ways to do so that are worth considering.
As I was saying earlier to Senator Robichaud, the arguments over the existence or non-existence of climate change aside, without even taking the issue into consideration, one thing is clear: at some point in time, oil will be a finite resource. And it will be worthwhile to work on other alternatives without worrying about climate change. Personally, that is not what tugs at my heart strings. What moves me is that we must find other solutions. And in Canada, we are so resource-rich. We must find solutions.
Notice here to what degree the doorway is adjusted on wood baffles without studs, always bearing in mind that just because we are using wood does not mean that we are using old design. Here we are seeing something very contemporary, in wood and in glass, in that community centre that I was showing you earlier on, and which, for younger generations — because the people sitting around this table are not all so young, are we? — the fact remains that for younger generations, if they only associate wood with log-style cabins or armoires with diamond mouldings, I am not sure we are going to really inspire our generation which, it must be said, was raised in the presence of IKEA.
It is not the case for us, but it is their case. We will therefore have to seduce them with renewed forms.
Here you see a very high-performance wooden window factory. They chose to use wood cladding that ages in a dark and clear manner. I must point out to you that all of the projects I am presenting from this technical mission won architecture prizes in Switzerland and in Austria.
You may like it or not, but these are projects that received awards from the architectural peers of these designers which, once again, have a very innovative way of using wood that does not require long-term maintenance.
Here we see something that all of the architects present fell in love with. This is a school built in a bucolic setting, absolutely fantastic, with very refined use of the interior wood and whose construction integrates an absolutely incredible energy efficiency.
The pool in the foreground is there as a reserve of water for the automatic sprinklers. In short, this is a rather extraordinary environment. The only thing we might find somewhat unsettling is the way in which they let the exterior wood age.
I will not hesitate to say that had they used another kind of siding, I do not think it would have made a major difference. What is important is that the building structure and its exterior environment use wood as the main resource.
Here you can see some appearance products, somewhat like you can see in the back of the room. In the neighbouring villages, we can see the people's small houses, in which wood is used in a very contemporary fashion. Once again, we may like it or we may not, but it is contemporary and it is very updated.
I will spare you the details of this architecture, but if I was going to get into that, I would say that on the exterior corner, on the bottom left, where the wooden planks meet, they introduced a galvanized steel detail in order to protect the wooden corners, and all of this is very finely achieved.
My architect colleagues refer to Switzerland and Austria as the high-resolution countries of architecture, as one might talk about a high-definition television, because the details are so refined and so well done. Once again, we are not talking about an architectural monument, it is just one house among many others.
Here we see another house in the same environment that presents very interesting characteristics. Note that one would have to have studied structure just to have created such a ceiling in the plant, which includes wood compression trusses and tensile steel trusses, which results in a wood and steel mix that is very efficient and very effective.
There is a new wood building that has just been completed at a college in Montreal, where the wood and steel roof framing uses wood at the tension and compression points. This makes for a remarkable work of architecture. This is the creation of Hoffman, an architect who comes from a family of architects and wood manufacturers who have created remarkable work in architecture.
Once again, every material has its place. Earlier on, we were talking about the energy required to produce each type of material. Imagine the growth of the entire biomass during a one-year period. Every year, the planet provides us with a phenomenal amount of renewable materials and this is a fact that we absolutely must take into account in our approach.
Here we are in Nantes, in France, at the home of Marika Frenette, who is originally from Quebec and is an architect who has lived in France for 20 years. She was one of the organizers of the technical mission. In this part of the residence, the decision was made to use crude wooden boards and a lively green siding, which is seen at the rear, in order to make a statement about something very fresh, which is achieved through an innovative architectural element.
Imagine the pleasure of building a daycare centre with such a finish. It is both interesting and amusing. We can see the house in its entirety with major and minor wood components, with the contrasts in material. It is very contemporary and very lively. This architecture would not be to everyone's taste, but this shows that it is possible to work with several styles of architecture.
The windows are extremely contemporary and efficient. Here we can see an interior design created with contemporary wood. There is a tree smack in the middle. This mix of genres and styles is altogether possible with these new proposed uses of wood.
We are here at the Grenoble wood fair. What you see is the elevation drawing of a mock up. You must disregard the ads for Quebecois houses in the rear. What I want to show you is in the foreground. Look at all of the materials that make up the roofs and the walls. They are all materials made of wood or of wood derivatives.
We are in a small house, a cottage, and rather than seeing a whole variety of materials such as vinyl, plastic and polystyrene, there is an array of wood-based materials. The building's structure is comprised of big wooden panels, with wood-based insulation overlying it so that the entire frame stays warm. There is also wooden siding on the exterior, which is an extremely good insulator.
It is a new way of doing things. One of the building's advantages from an environmental standpoint, and this is due to the use of wood, is that it is easier to tear the construction down when it comes time to do so. When the building's life cycle is over, you really need to think about how to pull it apart. Whenever you tear down a building made out of wood, it is easy to reuse its various components. The wood can be reused to make other structural elements.
And the worst case scenario is it can be used as biomass. That is very different from using wood that has insulating material glued onto it because the work involved in separating materials, tearing the structure down, uses a lot of energy. So that is an example of what not to do.
Let us turn our minds back to the Swiss-Austrian mission. I showed you a couple of pages to whet your appetite.
Senator Robichaud: We could go there and visit the site, could we not?
Mr. Bourassa: Next fall there will be a specific mission. Last fall after the Swiss-Austrian mission, there was the mission in France. There will be another one on wood next fall. It will take place in Scandinavia or most likely in California, and will provide an opportunity to look into alternative ways of doing things.
It is very important to stress that in Europe — and in France, more specifically — there has been, for some years already — and I think that it is on the agenda currently in the House of Commons — legislation requiring a certain percentage of wood in all buildings when architects design them. How did that go? Has it cramped architects' style? On the contrary. I had an opportunity to see French architects' expertise and submissions in architectural competitions. And we can see how they have used wood in their recent designs; we have seen this in France. I can tell you that a lot of imagination goes into using wood, as you saw earlier, such as unfinished boarding on green sheathing, which is kind of anomalous for wood. And yet, it does the job and it is very appealing.
We have just come back from the fact-finding trip that the jolly band from the Ordre des architectes and Hydro-Quebec went on. And I can tell you that for six days in a row, day after day, from 8 in the morning till 6 at night — and I do not know if you are aware, but architects do not have a reputation for being on time. And yet, everyone was on time, no one missed anything. It was fantastic.
We will speak briefly about the Minergie program, and you are about to get a glimpse of it. I am sure you have all heard in this committee about the North American certification LEED for green buildings. In Switzerland and Austria, the focus is on the Minergie program, which is a Swiss program that is probably more efficient when it comes to green accreditation.
And we are going to present a number of projects, a research institute, a college, multiple-residence housing, the headquarters for international markets, Green Office, which is basically an architect's office, and a civic centre that you saw earlier.
The Minergie label is an umbrella term for other labels such as Minergie Standard, Minergie Passif — so passive in this case does not mean a label that does not do anything. In Europe, when you refer to passive architecture, it means a building that does not require energy, one that produces as much as it uses. Whereas in Canada, when you refer to passive solar energy, it means the correct orientation of buildings. It is not exactly the same definition — Minergie écologique, which adds green components, for example, determines where materials are obtained.
So obviously, anyone with a stake in Minergie écologique, and the origins of building materials, is clearly going to promote the appropriate use of wood because wood is still the building material that uses the least amount of energy in its production and processing.
And then there is the crème de la crème, Minergie-P-Éco, which is both passive, green, and does not use much energy. They are two distinct notions.
For example, if I construct a very well insulated building, but I only use oil-based insulating panels — and bear in mind that oil is a non-renewable resource and that the panel itself is not recyclable — my energy efficiency level will be high, but my green rating will be much lower because of the choice of materials. Now, you cannot always tick all the boxes, that is obvious, but when you can, it is a good thing.
So under the Minergie label, there are certain basic requirements for the building structure.
Now, just remember that compared to a standard building, Minergie-compliant buildings use a lot less energy. The air circulates by way of a ``soft'' aeration system, which means that the windows can be opened, and there is a significant flow of air, albeit subtle, thereby avoiding the need for highly-complicated ventilation and air-conditioning systems.
And there is another important thing: under the Minergie accreditation, the building is not allowed to cost more, no more than 10 per cent more than a comparable building. That means that if you are trying to be green by using wood and other sorts of materials, and the building costs twice as much as a normal building, then you have not been green; you have used too many resources, too much energy, and too much money to be able to make the claim that you have been green.
It is an extremely important lesson, and if I can speak as an architect on behalf of my profession, the focus of architects' imagination and creativity must be, first and foremost, in ensuring that our buildings are harmonious, functional and durable.
They are the three pillars of successful architectural endeavour. If architecture does not include those three components, it is merely a sculpture, if it is harmonious, it is just construction, if it is rough and tough, the balance will not be achieved.
Now let us compare the Minergie label to Minergie Passif. There is more of an energy efficiency focus to Minergie P. What you have to remember, basically, is that Minergie P means you do not use over 30 kilowatts per hour per square metre, which is 38 kilowatts in the case of Minergie Standard, and that is a lot less in terms of consumption.
I am sorry you do not have the printed versions, but the staff have copies of the presentation and can print them later.
I also wanted to mention that when it comes to thermal insulation, it is the thickness that counts. Thirty-five centimetres means approximately 14 inches of insulation. Wood wool gets used a lot. It still does not exist here, but there is a mill that is going to open in the National Capital Region. There is also a lot of cellulose used in insulating products that they use, but that means you end up with very, very thick walls, which needs to be factored in.
I should also stress that under the Swiss and Austrian criteria, and to a large extent in France too, those that are at the forefront of the green revolution build walls that although very thick and very well insulated, nevertheless let the humidity escape from the building, they breathe. Just like you would not go cross-country skiing in a rain jacket — there are materials like GORE-TEX, for example, that allow the body's moisture to escape when you are engaged in these activities — we want to develop a housing environment that allows moisture to escape just like a GORE-TEX coat does. And as far as that is concerned I can speak frankly when I say that in Quebec and in Canada there is still a lot to be learned.
We are behind on that score, and we are still using type 1 vapour barriers, plastic and aluminum, and there are better ways of keeping moisture levels at an appropriate level in houses. I am not saying that you can snap your fingers and change things overnight, but things are moving on that front. Back home, in our architectural practice, we have been making walls that breathe for the past 20 years. Now let us be clear, having walls breathe does not mean that they are full of holes. I am talking about walls, just like GORE-TEX, which keep you warm, but which let the humidity out. And even if your rainproof coat had air holes where your armpits are, you would still be extremely uncomfortable. The same is true in a house, it is good to have something to circulate the air, but not just to control moisture.
So the resurgence of the use of wood in architecture is an extremely exciting opportunity. I have to say that some wood processing sectors in Quebec or in Canada will probably be replaced by sectors that produce wood-based insulation. And that is a good thing. I prefer the focus to be on wood-based insulation rather than newsprint.
Earlier I showed you the big overlaying panels for the frames of houses. There are sectors which manufacture those products in Canada.
There is a whole host of innovative products that can be developed in Canada from wood, rather than just producing 2x4s and 2x6s with no value-added component. Now that would be major.
Senator Eaton: What is wood wool?
Mr. Bourassa: It is insulating material which is like glass fibre wool. It is fibre made from wood. It is as green as things get. So there are really great opportunities there.
I heard today that in Trois-Rivières, a colleague who teaches pulp and paper techniques has no more students because no one wants to learn how to produce pulp and paper. You can build long-lasting buildings out of pulp and paper derivatives, and it is a lot more forward-looking than simply producing newsprint. We now know today, that the demand for newsprint will never be what it was and that reading newspapers over the Internet is the way of the future.
There are so many opportunities to do better than we are currently doing. I told you that there were a couple of somewhat dry pages, well there is one.
Now look at the bottom right-hand side of the page, at ``greening buildings.'' When you build a green building you are looking for raw materials that are widely available and a good share of recyclable materials, which Canada is very good at. When it comes to using low-impact construction materials we are on track in terms of manufacturing and development in the area of well-managed wood forests.
Let me turn back to what I was saying earlier about life cycles. We need to start thinking about buildings that are easy to dismantle, that are made from construction materials that can be reused or disposed of without hurting the environment.
On the bottom left-hand side of the page, there is a discussion on energy efficiency. When seeking Minergie accreditation, you need a total energy consumption of a minimum of 25 per cent of that of a standard building and the use of fossil fuel energy must at a minimum be 50 per cent of that of a standard building. You can see those considerations under the various criteria on health, comfort, energy efficiency and how green the building is.
I told you that I wanted to really inundate you with images. It was perhaps pretentious on my part, but I at least want to show you a couple of buildings that in some cases will astound you. This is an aquatic research centre that does not use any energy. When you see it in person, I can tell you that it is more than spectacular.
This building is covered with tiltable blue glass laminate. Remember that the building does not consume energy, that there is no heating system or traditional air conditioning system, and yet it is remarkably comfortable.
There are even toilets which separate urine from solid matter because the research centre studies the two substances separately. I especially wanted to show you this very modern building covered in glass laminate and built out of wood. It is not a steel or concrete structure, but rather a double frame structure made out of 2x4s and 2x6s with a nice thick layer of insulating wall and walls which are still able to breathe and let the humidity out.
It is a very modern building that one would initially think was made out of steel and concrete, but which is constructed out of wood, and that is remarkable. It explains here how gray energy is used. Gray energy is used in manufacturing materials. Obviously, the longer the building lasts, the less important the notion of gray energy is because the cost is spread over the number of years.
Saving on resources, environmental compatibility, and gray energy are three very important factors. In this atrium, the very flow of air ensures that the building is always comfortable, because in these buildings a balance is struck between night and daytime temperatures.
I would now like to introduce another concept here which is undoubtedly tied to green architecture. I want to point out the fact that in most of the projects that you see, the fresh air, rather than coming through a grate in the wall, travels through underground pipes. It is what we call in Europe Canadian shafts.
In Canada, virtually no one knows what a Canadian shaft is. It is a set of smooth and washable pipes that are laid in the ground in a way that ensures that there is never any mold in the pipes. The air does not enter the building at minus 40 degrees and immediately provide ventilation. Instead, the temperature of the air has time to increase as it comes in contact with the ground which is always hotter. The air temperature increases and so the cost of heating goes down.
There are also various types of solar panels on the roof of this building. If you look at the three columns, a conventional building consumes that amount there in energy, whereas buildings compliant with Minergie, Minergie P and our project use far less energy, particularly in the orange section which indicates heat production. It really makes a big difference.
Here you can see the first passive school building. It is a remarkable school. The frame is made out of wood and the entire slab is in concrete. If you look at the photo on the left, you will see a big glass panel. It looks like the glass is transparent when in fact there is a metal grill in front of it which filters the sunlight so that it is not too strong.
You can see a frame that looks like it is made from wood and shutters which prevent overheating, when necessary. This kind of blind is increasingly common here in Quebec. You can see that there is wood sheeting and a lot of exterior decorative wood.
The classrooms are just a delight. It is magnificent. Take a look at the big main corridor and the decorative wood on the ceiling. Look at the interplay between the light and the ventilation in a checker board effect.
In the photo on the right, there is the main corridor and overhead walkways which lead to the various classrooms. This is highly refined, and yet done at a very modest price. You must remember that a wooden structure costs less than a structure made out of other materials.
Here you can see Canadian shafts with big pipes and filters. I am just skipping over these technical details quickly. You can see the same photo here, but with a lot of highly varied detailing in the wood to ensure maximum greening. Here is a small building with three residences. There is refinement in every detail. The wood is used here very differently than what you would normally see. The wood is prominent and the materials used are green.
Here is an office building; it looks small, but it is the headquarters of the multinational I wanted to talk about. For those of you who know Switzerland, it is a country with a reputation for having manicured lawns. But in some green buildings and in a lot of government buildings, there has been a paradigm shift: it seems like the lawn is, at the very most, cut only twice a year.
One should not be surprised to see an overgrown lawn. But for us, it was quite surprising. We were in Switzerland and it was hay instead of lawn. Quite amazing.
The building here was made out of prefabricated wood panelling. The concept of prefabrication and wood are both very important. You cannot develop a wood construction industry by building on-site and having the wood spoiled by inclement weather, storms, snow, et cetera. Wood, wood frames, and architecture with wood go hand in hand with prefabrication. Quite clearly, that is one of the defining characteristics in Europe. There are a lot of construction sites in the Germanic countries; Switzerland, Austria and Germany. The way the worksites are organized is remarkable. Much more so than in France where there is a kind of folkloric Latin disorder, based on what architects over there tell us. Do not be surprised if in the presentation, a lot of references are made to prefabricated wooden buildings. The photos are not as good as I would have hoped. Look at the environment for an office space; the ceiling is made out of wood, there is a wall of plants that give off moisture; moveable and flexible office spaces with indirect light. You can barely make it out, but there are foot lamps which light up the ceiling in a line and it is all very mobile.
Here is something interesting for new and innovative industries in Canada, it is the use of phase-changing partition glass. You can see on the far right in the photo a glass panel which appears translucent rather than transparent. This is light phase-changing glass, which is double-paned and contains salt cells. The salt becomes transparent when exposed to sunlight. It attracts heat which means that you can have very well lit environments while at the same time enjoying tremendous energy efficiency. It is absolutely extraordinary. And it exists.
That is a side view of the building. You can still see the translucent side and the glass, but that makes the building energy efficient and very appealing. It received the Swiss and European Solar Awards. The glass panelling is phenomenal. The front of the panelling incorporates phase-changing cells. The glass is prism-like and reflects the sun when it is too low so that the building does not overheat. It is comfortable in both the summer and wintertime. These are opportunities to do more. We must not miss the boat. That would be a pity. This is still the interior environment. The mechanical spaces that I will skip over quickly. The ventilation is built such that there is nothing sticking out.
Another case study, once again. European architectural awards. It is an architectural and engineering office. In Switzerland, architects and engineers are often trained together. It is a very German way of doing things. The volume in each case is very compact. I wish I could show you the intricate details. Show you how the windowsills are built. It is quite the feat. Once again, nothing is on a huge scale. The volume is highly compact. Have a look at the fine detail. It is absolutely unbelievable.
It is only the firms that operate in sustainable development. You can see on the right the building under construction is being built using prefabricated components. You can see on the left the building covered with pre-oxidized planks. I visited a sawmill three weeks ago not far from here that has this product. It is fantastic. There is currently a resurgence across Canada when it comes to wood products. There needs to be an inventory of them so that they become better known. There is no hinge. Whenever a length of wood is finished, an aluminum mold is used. There are window sills that are resistant to intemperate weather because metal has been used in their construction. Yellow shutters have been included that can be rolled down and raised according to the level of light desired. There is a focus on detail. Here are the building's wood components in the construction phase.
Again, the office interiors. Clay tiles have been put on top of the wooden beams in order to maximize energy efficiency and thermal mass. It is another basic architecture construction technique to ensure the walls are a certain weight. This has certainly been achieved in this particular case.
You can see here that they have used white beams so that there is as much light as possible and so that the whole space looks open. There are sizable windows but in this particular instance they are not just glass boxes. You can see the difference in energy consumption between a standard building and a Green Office building using green materials. Here, you can see the total energy usage. The difference really is remarkable.
Here is another extremely forward-looking feature of this building. They have gone as far as to use granular heating. A low heating capacity is sufficient. You can see the heating requirements for this building — shown in green — versus a standard building, it is infinitely less. CO2 and SO2 emissions compared to standard buildings, also a remarkable difference. Hot water consumption is ``the icing on the cake'': the building's toilets have their waste piped to a composting area in the basement. I am not saying this will be ready for widespread application tomorrow. But they did it. It works and it is not science fiction. It works in areas where there are problems building beside a lake, which can occur with lakeside inns. People are doing that.
The interior design is very contemporary. It is not neo-my-cabin-in-Canada nor is it neo-granola or neo-rasta. The lines are clear and it does the job.
Here is our famous community centre where, once again, you see the solar roof. The interior is again very bright, and wood is a major component. You also see our photovoltaic roof which is astounding.
That completes the overview I wanted to give you on new-generation wood, and on wood as a driver to stimulate a new industry in Canada in the building sector.
In conclusion, I want to mention that I had the pleasure of speaking at a conference on wood in Milan, a month ago. Italians in northern Italy have quite a niche. They too are intensively promoting wood. France and Austria want to promote wood for all the reasons we are familiar with.
They told us that what they would like the most is for us to export wood components and not ``air.'' I asked them what they meant by ``exporting air.'' For them, ready-made products, homes and walls, are air. What they want is for us to export our wood so that they can use it.
We have been doing that long enough with the United States, we are not going to cross the Atlantic and export wood to Italy so they can add the value to it. But if we are not aware of what they want in Europe, if we do not know what we need to export, we will be left without products. I emphasize this, because there is almost a hybrid product to be designed between what is being done in Europe and what is being done here.
We do have good practices despite all that I can criticize about plastic and composite materials. We have good practices and good ways of using wood which are highly efficient. I am thinking about structures, trusses that we use. That is a very efficient use of quantities of wood versus the span.
In Europe, their attitude is to use as much wood as possible in a building, because they want to store as much carbon as they can. Based on my experience giving the speech to our architects in Quebec, that is a hard sell, because our main mission in building a building is to house people and events. It is not to store carbon.
We must look at both sides in developing our industry. If we want to export, we must not forget to tie our products into others. They are clearly far more advanced than we are, in some regards, I admit. Just think about thermal mass and walls that diffuse heat.
Senator Eaton: Thank you, Mr. Bourassa. I am tempted to tell you that we are not sure either that we have the value-added wood products that we need in Canada. Having said that, if we were to make a recommendation to government for federal buildings, what percentage of wood would you recommend we suggest? What could we suggest to them to start with?
Mr. Bourassa: I would be very uncomfortable suggesting a precise percentage. Clearly, a percentage must be put in context, but I think that architects have the necessary creativity to respond regardless of the percentage.
In some cases, in the first year, we will undoubtedly see some situations working better than others. There will be better uses and ones that are not so good, but as we say: practice makes perfect.
The government will not risk compromising buildings by establishing a percentage. What it will do, however, is create demand, interest, and creativity. I assure you, when we went to see the buildings as part of another technical mission to France, we were amazed to see all of the ways to use woods that had been developed. We saw a small covered stadium in the suburbs of Paris, suited to small cities, which was a jewel in terms of wood use and which had also won architectural awards.
That is the objective. I do not think the percentage is really all that important now, what is more urgent is starting to prepare the legislation, the incentive. I can only be in favour of that.
Senator Eaton: That could stimulate the production of value-added wood products as well.
Mr. Bourassa: Absolutely. That is clear. There is also innovation and the ecological aspect.
Senator Eaton: How could we achieve greater cooperation among the provinces? You have just talked about Hydro- Québec's initiative, which is, by the way, very interesting, but it seems to me that the provinces do not talk to each other. There are some very interesting initiatives in Quebec, and some very interesting ones in British Columbia, but the provinces do not talk to each other.
Mr. Bourassa: Natural Resources Canada recently had an initiative for the building of five projects. A grant was offered for building five wood demonstration projects across Canada. That is a very interesting start. I had the pleasure of being part of the jury for these projects. It is a very interesting initiative, except that —
Senator Eaton: Where are the buildings?
Mr. Bourassa: They are currently being built. The jury met last fall, so it will all unfold in the coming year. I can tell you that the examples are very helpful to us in fact. Everyone has their temperament, and personally, I believe strongly in examples, and I think we need even more wood demonstration projects. We need more and more of these initiatives.
I spoke at two conferences in Abitibi, last fall. They have wood, but do not really use it. Like everyone else, they are in a period of reflection. I gave them some ideas, for example, on using clay which they have in abundance, along with wood to create innovative products, ecological products, and so on.
There is a lot of room for big demonstration projects. Large projects in Vancouver, for example, the wonderful stadium that was built in Vancouver, it is magnificent! The magnificent design was made using wood which had been ravaged by the pine beetle, if I am not mistaken. That is very good, but we also need other, different-scale presentation projects. I am going to go back to cooperation, but I want to insist on the fact that while we are currently focused on promoting the use of wood in non-residential construction, we cannot forget about promoting the use of wood in small homes and small buildings.
Generally speaking, in New Brunswick, in Vancouver or elsewhere, more often than not we see small houses but not wood. We see gypsum, vinyl flooring, carpeting, but not wood. We must come up with some different formulas. The industry is very reluctant to change because a large industry is required to develop new products for small buildings. This alignment is hard to achieve because we want to keep our comfortable slippers and not take any risks. That is normal, it is like a car, even if it is a fuel-efficient car, the fact remains that it is studied by engineers and designers before it is marketed.
So, in terms of collaboration between the provinces, we should still consider exchanging various pilot projects on various scales. They exist in many areas, but the Outaouais, Quebec and Ontario regions are where we do not have enough wood-based pilot projects.
So, given that there is a lot of federal government construction in the region, I have to tell you that a federal government incentive like that would be more than welcome and would show you, senators and members of Parliament, what wooden buildings have to offer. I would like to show you all the wood architecture on the planet, but your time is limited, and I understand that. But there still is some work to do in terms of collaboration.
Also, building science needs to evolve. I did not show you this earlier, but, in Europe, the Du Pont de Nemours Company, no small player in petrochemicals and construction, was not born yesterday nor does it have exactly a ``crunchy granola'' image. But, in Europe, they have developed vapour barriers to release the humidity from houses in order to respond to a European need, because European architects want walls that ``breathe.'' Du Pont offers this in Europe, but not in North-America. We need to be able to import these products.
A company importing innovative products would be welcome and could have demonstration projects up and running as we develop the industry here. Obviously, we do not want to be shipping materials from one side of the Atlantic to the other; that would make no environmental or economic sense. But we have to start somewhere, and people have to be shown. I do not know how many presentations to workers I have given.
[English]
Senator Martin: First, thank you for your very passionate presentation. You are a great spokesperson to show us an example of what we can do with the wood culture in Canada, where we have some of the most amazing natural resources.
I am from B.C. and I was very happy to hear you mention the beautiful Richmond Olympic Oval.
The structures depicted in your presentation and photographs are magnificent and very interesting, but I have to say they felt far away, in that it is Europe and it is quite far away. I was thinking about the fact that in British Columbia there seems to be more of a wood culture, and I have seen many structures, small and large, including this oval, constructed from wood. When I come to Ontario, and I go into some of the neighbourhoods, I see such a lack of wood being used.
I am curious about your special mission. This presentation featured the projects of Europe. Do you have a presentation of what exists in Canada, especially in provinces like B.C. where we do have more of a culture?
Mr. Bourassa: I do not personally have those presentations. I know those projects, of course, but the organization in Quebec promoting wood has many of those photographs, and this organization, called Seco-Bois, gives a lot of help with references for architects and engineers, and we have a lot.
Senator Martin: I am glad to hear that. We need to be multi-pronged in our approach. One is definitely what you are doing and what you have shown us today, but to be able to look also at what we are doing in Canada in provinces where maybe there is more of a culture. That way it seems much more close to home and perhaps that much more achievable.
One example I was wondering about is perhaps a concrete step the government could take. Vancouver had the Olympic Games, and Toronto is hosting a major festival, and there are events where there could be legacy projects like the Richmond Olympic Oval, and these successful projects could become multiple in number, and then it would have a real effect across Canada. We live in such a huge country. I wonder how you, in your passionate presentation, could do that with what exists in Canada. I think that could also have some very positive effects for architecture, designers and the industry itself.
Are you doing that, and if not would you be doing that in Canada with what we already have here? We have so many great examples as well.
Mr. Bourassa: I agree with you; it is time now to do something coast to coast. To be very useful it should be by thematic building. For example, in Europe there are many associations of mayors for wood, for example. All little municipalities have to build something some day. For that, the first book that is needed should be for municipal buildings: What is a small city hall in Alberta in wood or what is a nice fire hall?
[Translation]
For these various building types, that is what is most useful. It requires resources to do it, and obviously, the Ordre des architectes does not have those resources. We need publishers to publish worthwhile books on this. It is a very worthwhile area, for sure.
I have talked to you about the future, about the industry of the future, but you are absolutely right to think in terms of what we are doing now. However, there is one extremely important caution. We have good architecture in wood here in Canada, but, unfortunately, we also have bad architecture. If the people drawing up the lists of what we have done are unable to distinguish between what is good and what is bad, I can assure you that we are going to lose ground.
A year ago, colleagues from Quebec were telling me I was exaggerating. They started to look at 20- and 25-year-old wooden buildings the way I would as an architect. As an architect, I personally have had to renovate some wooden buildings designed in the early 1960s. But I would expect a school to last over 50 years. And when exterior columns have to be replaced, wooden ones do have to be protected. At the moment, we are developing a guide on best practices for wood. We need the know-how if we want things to last.
This is why we must remain quite critical on the way in which wood has been used in architecture over the last 50 or 60 years. I feel that is very, very important.
We already saw one building with wood beams sticking out. A colleague of mine wanted to show me how the beams had deteriorated, but when he returned a few days later to photograph them with the sun at the right angle, they had already been cut off and the entire building had been covered in steel. We need to be very vigilant in things like that.
This is why, in my opinion — I am being self-serving here — you cannot have people promoting wood in the construction industry who do not know construction, who are not sensitive to the three characteristics I referred to earlier on: harmony, function and durability. It is not enough to deliver a nice-looking wood building, cut a pretty ribbon, admire it all, and pat ourselves on the back for encouraging the lumber industry. We need to go back and look at the building 10 years later; that will tell us something. And that is what we have done. We have done it in France; we went to see two-year-old buildings that were disasters. On the website of the organization that promotes wood in France, it looked quite beautiful. But on site, it was far less so.
So, we do not just need the will, we need people who know the best practices. People do not just suddenly become competent overnight.
Senator Segal: I would like to talk about a major issue: the construction marketplace. Could you tell me about the positive and negative forces when it comes to choosing wood?
Do you believe that the lumber industry is competitive with other industries, like steel?
Mr. Bourassa: On the positive side, wood is being very well promoted in Quebec at the moment. There are many ad campaigns and many wood projects underway, a sports centre, an arena, a number of major projects are being done in wood. We have an increasing number of easy demonstration projects underway, except in the Outaouais. However, with the demand from architects wanting to use wood in construction, the industry is not keeping up at the moment, and there are delays in delivery.
We are not that worried because other industries are taking up the slack. I do not have concerns in this regard; however, we have had delivery delays on some projects. On the negative side: we do not have enough structural engineers who are used to working with wood — not those who say they are qualified, but those who really are. On some projects, architect colleagues of mine have told me that they wanted to use wood, but the engineers discouraged them. Structural engineers need additional training.
There are major projects underway for arenas and sports centres. There has been a lot of new construction in this area, but not in housing, because people say that houses are already made of wood. Two-by-fours and two-by-sixes are already being used. All the things I referred to earlier, thermal mass, walls that ``breathe,'' none of that is on the table because architects do not build many houses. That is significantly stalling advances in building science at the moment.
You have to believe in your mission; if we have faith, and, I hope, get additional resources, we will be able to continue to support development projects in the Saguenay, the Abitibi region and throughout Canada. We should be able to demonstrate the value of houses where wood is used both inside and out, in an Ontario suburb, for instance, without making the mistake of building something entirely out of wood or entirely out of plasterboard.
I showed you a photo of a building that shows too much wood, in my opinion. It is one example of the importance of materials being used in proportion. We need demonstration projects like this everywhere.
In New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, for instance, there is wood and it is used to build houses. But if you are counting on big buildings, arenas, sport centres or condos to boost the lumber industry, I am sorry, but how many arenas are built in New Brunswick every year?
Senator Robichaud: Not many, because the one that was built burned down.
Mr. Bourassa: It is less spectacular to introduce a wooden house in Mississauga, Ontario with real recycled wood. I could have shown you a Japanese design made of wood. It is astounding! In the architecture magazines that architecture students have been shown for years, all you would see was concrete, glass and steel. A culture of wood has existed in Japan for thousands of years, as it has in Scandinavia. Concrete and steel for architect-designed houses have not been around that long, only since after the war. Before that, it did not exist.
To go back to your question, one of the negatives is promoting wood for buildings of different scales.
Let me tell you about another negative point related to wood promotion. You all know of wooden buildings with 6, 8 or 12 units where people hear their neighbours because the soundproofing is poor. That has given wood a bad image. The mayor of every city thinks of those examples when they look at building a city hall. If I cannot show them a better example, it is hard to convince them otherwise. When I promote wood, people have difficulty understanding because these wood buildings contain one or two construction components that do not work, and that always causes problems.
Take a three-storey building, with people living above each other; we have a lot of them in this country. The outside is often made of brick. Does brick contract? Not at all. Brick is very stable. But what happens to the wood on the inside over the years? It compresses. That is normal for wood. So the window sill that is resting on brick and that is supposed to let water drip outwards tips the other way causing the water to leak inside. This water causes the wall to rot, mould to set in and all of the ensuing damage you can well imagine. It is a simple detail, but so long as it is not understood, those buildings remain associated with poor quality.
There is a second problem with those buildings — you may find I am straying from the subject of wood, but I do have to mention it. I do not understand why building science has not evolved here in Canada. Take a toilet on a plywood floor five-eighths of an inch thick. This toilet is bolted down. The seal between the toilet and the wood is made with layer of yellow wax. Have you ever seen that? You must have seen how unstable that can be. What happens over time? It leaks and ends up leaking into the apartment below depending on what floor it is located. So, the ceiling in the bathroom below gets mouldy. I swear to you that, already, I have seen a 20-unit CHMC building, for example, become a total loss. Not because the building was falling down, but because there were small leaks around the windows, leaks resulting from plumbing problems, a fish tank and a faulty roof. There was so much damage that it was a total loss. I am not making this story up.
Small wooden buildings must be brought up to a level of quality that is no longer synonymous with cracked walls or creaky floors.
Senator Robichaud: What drove this use of wood in Europe? This is a whole new educational process. I am impressed by the idea of breathing walls. Here, we stop them breathing by putting a layer of plastic on the inside to stop moisture from getting through or the paint from peeling.
You mentioned insulation material and wood wool; is this due to the fact that people want to be greener by consuming less energy and by using more locally available materials?
Mr. Bourassa: Clearly, there is a will to do that. I have a promotional document from the Loire Valley. They have amazing promotion. They decided that they would take care of their own economy, that it would not be based on oil, because they did not have any, but on wood. So, for the last 40 years, an entire environmental architecture movement has developed based on wood. Eventually, industry was able to meet the needs of this environmental architecture by offering more environmentally-friendly products, but on an industrial scale. That is the point that needs to be reached. For example, if someone wanted to build a house out of bales of straw, I would not agree with the principle.
Senator Robichaud: There is one close to my house.
Mr. Bourassa: There was one in Shawinigan, Quebec; it collapsed and someone lost his life. It did not get a lot of media coverage. Architecture that uses bales of straw is not using construction materials, it is using an agricultural product.
Sometimes it is dense, sometimes it is not; sometimes it is well constructed and sometimes it is not. The product has no quality control or standards, which can be a problem. So should the federal government be promoting the use of bales of straw in the construction of its buildings? As things currently stand, my answer is no. It is not a construction material, it is an agricultural product.
In Europe, the debate was raised by an environmental architecture movement driven by the will of elected representatives at local or regional levels. The government took the issue in hand, and developed legislation on the use of wood in building construction.
Senator Robichaud: We often hear about the code in Canada. The Building Code is a factor that limits the use of wood. We do not know enough about the qualities of wood or about the ways of using them. How did they get around this problem, given that they must certainly have building codes too?
Mr. Bourassa: If I may, let me bring you over to this side of the Atlantic where things are changing. In Quebec, for example, a six-floor wooden building has been built. This is a recent and unprecedented development. The new code, an objective-based code, allows for safe solutions and other techniques. Rather than giving a recipe, it tells us that we can have a safe building with such and such ingredients. We have also received permission to build a five-storey building in a region and we are about to do so.
The code allows a lot of things. Building with wood is not an obstacle. It is sometimes considered an obstacle, you are right. They wave the code at us and tell us that it is an obstacle. But when you look closely, you see that this is not the case. Of course, you have to go to the trouble of looking.
As far as I am concerned, if I were to build a large wooden building in Quebec, I would not worry so much about the code, I would only have to comply with the Régie du bâtiment. My main concern has to do with the dates of delivery of the wooden structures. Wooden buildings and houses have been built for a long time.
[English]
Senator Duffy: Congratulations, Mr. Bourassa, on a fabulous presentation. Your enthusiasm and knowledge have given us all a boost. I wish that the Canadian Wood Council, which has been here before, would take some of your enthusiasm and energy.
I have a couple of quick questions. Are Glassex windows, those special walls that the senator was referring to, available in Canada?
Mr. Bourassa: Not yet. I am working to import Glassex, but I lack the time.
Senator Duffy: Finally, in Europe, is there any concern that mandating the use of wood is a violation of, say, the GATT — General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade — or the World Trade Organization international trade obligations?
[Translation]
Mr. Bourassa: I would like to have the last part of the question translated for me.
Senator Segal: Does legislation promoting the use of wood create any problems with international agreements such as the GATT?
Mr. Bourassa: I have not heard any comments to that effect.
[English]
Senator Duffy: Thank you, congratulations, and I appreciate very much your coming here this evening.
[Translation]
Mr. Bourassa: If you will allow me a final word, I would say that government, industry and especially our scientific organizations that are responsible for building science have to have a very strong will if they are going to promote things other than the plastic vapour barrier. If we only want to build arenas and stadiums, building science is not compromised in any way. For the residences in which we all live, it is very important for our health that things should evolve. But this is not something that moves quickly. There must be the will and the inputs to allow the ``passive house'' to be demonstrated in Canada. I cannot believe that we cannot have a ``passive house'' demonstration in every province.
Senator Robichaud: We have none.
Mr. Bourassa: We have none.
The Chair: Mr. Bourassa, we would like to thank you for your excellent, your extraordinary presentation on the use of wood in industry and in construction in general. Your presentation was most enlightening. We could spend several more hours on it. We will certainly have the opportunity to share other elements of the report with you.
[English]
Honourable senators, before I declare the adjournment, I see that Senator Duffy would like to ask another question.
Senator Duffy: I have a question for Mr. Bourassa.
[Translation]
Could we have a copy of your video presentation, please?
Mr. Bourassa: You already have it. You can look at it more calmly and serenely than I can.
Senator Segal: And, no doubt, more slowly.
[English]
The Chair: I declare the meeting adjourned. Thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)