2014 BCBC Envelope Compliance - ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB

October 8, 2014
Envelope Compliance
ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB 2011

OVERVIEW
 Code requirements and the Standards
 Broad overview of the Standards
 ASHRAE 90.1 prescriptive requirements
2
and trade-off method for Envelope
 NECB Prescriptive requirements and
trade-off method for Envelope
 Summary comparison of the prescriptive
requirements and what it means in the
BC building context
 Looking at different methods of
accounting for thermal bridging

STANDARDS IN CODES
5
ASHRAE 90.1 2004 – Previous BCBC
ASHRAE 90.1 2007 – Previous VBBL
ASHRAE 90.1 2010 & NECB 2011 –
Current BCBC and VBBL

ASHRAE 90.1 2010
6
WHO ARE THEY?
American Society of Heating
Refrigeration and Air-conditioning
Engineers
WHAT IS THE STANDARD?
First addition developed in 1970
In 1999 the standard was put into
continuous maintenance
Applies to all commercial buildings
and MURBS greater than 3 stories.

ASHRAE 90.1 OVERVIEW
7
ALTERNATIVE PATHS FOR
COMPLIANCE
Prescriptive
Trade-off
Energy cost budget
PRESCRIPTIVE PATH (OR TRADE-OFF)
REQUIRE THAT ALL PARTS OF THE
STANDARD BE MET:
Part 5 - Building envelope
Part 6 - Heating, ventilating and
air-conditioning
Part 7 - Service water heating
Part 8 - Power
Part 9 - Lighting
Mandatory Part 10 - Other equipment
Provisions

ASHRAE 90.1 OVERVIEW
8
ASHRAE 2004
Baseline
ASHRAE 2007
Increased BE
requirements
ASHRAE 2010
No major changes
in BE requirements

NECB 2011
 Developed by Natural Resources
9
Canada & the National Research
Council for Canada
 What is the Standard?
 Last version was in 1997 (MNECB)
 Design intent was to be roughly equivalent
to ASHRAE 90.1 2010
 Applies to new buildings (except part 9),
additions to existing building, but silent on
renovations
 Before now, not referenced in BCBC or
VBBL
 MNECB is referenced in LEED

NECB OVERVIEW
10
ALTERNATIVE PATHS FOR COMPLIANCE
 Prescriptive
 Trade-off (simple or detailed)
 Energy simulation (building energy compliance)
PRESCRIPTIVE PATH (OR TRADE-OFF) REQUIRE THAT ALL
PARTS OF THE STANDARD BE MET:
 Part 3 – Building envelope
 Part 4 – Lighting
 Part 5 – Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems
 Part 6 – Service water heating systems
 Part 7 – Electrical power systems and motors

ZONES AND HEATING DEGREE DAYS (HDD)
11
ASHRAE 90.1 Climate zones for BC

ZONES AND HEATING DEGREE DAYS (HDD)
12

ASHRAE 90.1 2010
BUILDING ENVELOPE

ASHRAE 90.1- BUILDING ENVELOPE
14

ASHRAE 90.1- MANDATORY PROVISIONS
THIS MEANS THAT THE
BUILDING SHOULD BE
DESIGNED TO MEET
THESE PROVISIONS:
Insulation
Air leakage
• Air-barrier
selection and
design
• Limit to
fenestration and
doors including
cargo doors
• Vestibule
Fenestration and
Doors values
• NFRC
15

ASHRAE 90.1 MANDATORY PROVISIONS
16
ASHREA 90.1
Air leakage
limits
NAFS
Air Leakage
limits
ASHRAE Type Limit
Glazed Swinging entrance
door & revolving doors
1.0 cfm/ft2 at 1.57psf
Curtain wall & Storefront 0.06cfm/ft2 at 1.57psf
Other products 0.2cfm/ft2 at 1.57psf or
0.3 cfm/ft2 at 6.24psf
NAFS defines air leakage by performance
class (R, LC, CW and AW) and air infiltration /
exfiltration levels (A2, A3 and Fixed) and can
be more stringent:
Fixed as low as 0.2 L/s.m2 at 300Pa (or 0.04cfm/ft2 at
6.24psf)
Operable as low as 0.5 L/s.m2 at 300Pa (or 0.1cfm/ft2
at 6.24psf)

ASHRAE 90.1 PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD
17
THE PRESCRIPTIVE
METHOD CAN ONLY BE
USED IF:
The vertical
fenestration ≤ 40%
of Gross wall Area
The skylight
fenestration ≤ 5%
of gross roof area

ASHRAE 90.1 - OPAQUE AREAS
 For conditioned spaces the
18
exterior building envelope
shall comply with, to either:
the residential or the non-residential
requirements in
the tables
 For semi-heated spaces the
semi-exterior building
envelope needs to comply
with the requirements in the
tables

ASHRAE 90.1 - PRESCRIPTIVE OPAQUE AREAS
19
THE TABLES CONTAINING THE THERMAL PERFORMANCE
REQUIREMENTS ARE PROVIDED IN THE STANDARD, BY CLIMATIC
ZONES, AND LOOK LIKE THIS:
For all opaque elements (except doors) compliance should be
demonstrated by the following methods:
 Maximum U-factors, C-factors or F-factors for the entire assembly
 Minimum rated R values of insulation
Exception: For multiple assemblies within a single class of
construction for a single conditioning space, weighed average can be
used.

ASHRAE 90.1 PRESCRIPTIVE OPAQUE AREAS
20
Components
Zone 5
Non-Residential Residential Semi-Heated
U factor R value U factor R value U factor R value
Roof - insulation above
deck
0.048
(R20.8)
20.0c.i. 0.048
(R20.8)
20.0c.i. 0.119
(R8.4)
7.6c.i.
Roof - Attic 0.027
(R37.0)
38.0 0.027
(R37.0)
38.0 0.053
(R18.9)
19.0
Walls - Mass 0.090
(R11.1)
11.4c.i. 0.080
(R12.5)
13.3c.i. 0.151
(R6.6)
5.7c.i.
Walls - Steel framed 0.064
(R15.6)
13.0+7.5c.i. 0.064
(R15.6)
13.0+7.5c.i. 0.124
(R8.1)
13.0
Walls - Wood framed 0.064
(R15.6)
13.0+3.8c.i. 0.051
(R19.6)
13.0+7.5c.i. 0.089
(R11.2)
13.0

ASHRAE 90.1 PRESCRIPTIVE - OPAQUE AREAS
21
SO THAT MEANS:
 If there is more than nails or screws going through the
insulation, it is not continuous
 If there are studs, girts, clips, even brick ties they need
to be accounted for.
 This can be done by calculating the effective U (or R)
values of these assemblies

22
NOMINAL R VALUES
Rated R values which do not
take into account framing or
other element interrupting
the insulation
vs. EFFECTIVE R VALUES
Calculated R
values which
allows for the
impact of
thermal bridges

23
Zone 4&5 = 0.064

24
Zone 4 = 0.064 Zone 5 = 0.051

25
Components
Residential
R values
Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8
Roof - insulation
above deck
20.0c.i. 20.0c.i. 20.0c.i. 20.0c.i. 20.0c.i.
Roof - Attic 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 49.0
Walls - Mass 11.4c.i. 13.3c.i. 15.2c.i. 15.2c.i. 25.0c.i.
Walls - Steel framed 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+15.6c.i. 13.0+18.8c.i.
Walls - Wood
framed
13.0+3.8c.i. 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+7.5c.i. 13.0+15.6c.i.

ASHRAE 90.1 PRESCRIPTIVE - FENESTRATION
Windows <40% of gross wall area and Skylights <5% gross roof area
26
All fenestration compliance
shall be demonstrated
through meeting:
• U factor no greater than the
prescriptive requirements
• SHGC no greater than the
prescriptive requirements
If there are multiple assemblies, compliance shall be based on an area-weighted
average U-factor or SHGC (for a single space-conditioning and
within a single class of construction).
The SHGC can be reduced using a multiplier when a permanent projection
provides shading for the window

ASHRAE 90.1 PRESCRIPTIVE - FENESTRATION
27
Components
Zone 5
Residential Non-Residential Semi-Heated
U factor SHGC U factor SHGC U factor SHGC
Non-Metal Framing 0.35
0.40 for
all
0.35
0.40 for
all
1.20
0.40 for
all
Metal Framing (curtain
wall and storefront) 0.45 0.45 1.20
Metal Framing (entrance
doors) 0.80 0.80 1.20
Metal Framing (operable
and fixed windows, non-entrance
doors) 0.55 0.55 1.20
Skylight (glass,
without curb)
0-2%
0.69
0.49
0.69
0.49
1.36
NR
2-5% 0.39 0.39 NR

ASHRAE 90.1 TRADE-OFF
28
The trade-off method allows greater flexibility when some of the building envelope
components are not meeting:
• The basic requirements for the Prescriptive method (e.g. > 40% window
to wall ratio and/or >5% skylight to roof ratio)
• The prescriptive R or U values
• Trade-offs are made between any building envelope components
(but just building envelope component)
• It implies that some of the building envelope components exceed
the minimum requirements
• Schedules of operation, lighting power, equipment power, occupant
density, and mechanical systems need to be the same for both the
proposed building and the base building

29
THE BUILDING ENVELOPE COMPLIES WHEN:
Envelope performance
factor of proposed building
Envelope performance
factor of base building ≤
The base building is a building that has 40% fenestration
to gross wall area and for which all BE components meet
the prescriptive minimum U value
The envelope performance factor is calculated using the
information contained in normative appendix C

30
Need to :
 Do take-offs for all the different BE
components i.e. floor, roof, wall and
fenestration assemblies for every
space-conditioning category and
every orientation.
 Evaluate the U values of each
component including SHGC and VT
for fenestration.
 Enter all the numbers into a series
of equations that you can find in
normative Appendix C*.
COMcheck * (Now has Canadian climate data).
Axis – Raymond Letkeman Architects

NECB - MANDATORY PROVISIONS
35
NO SPECIFIC
MANDATORY
PROVISIONS
But more specific than ASHRAE
on how to deal with effect of
structural members that may
partially and completely
penetrate the envelope
In the
prescriptive
requirements, we
find that :
Insulation should be installed in a manner that avoids
affecting its R value (convection, wetting, etc.).
Insulation value required depends on zone, assembly
(wall, roof or floor) and location (above or below
grade or spaces heated to different temperature)
Air leakage should be controlled, including at
fenestration and doors, which have limits of air
leakage allowable
A vestibule is likely required

NECB - PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD
THE PRESCRIPTIVE
METHOD CAN ONLY
36
BE USED IF:
FDWR ≤ 0.40 for HDD < 4000
FDWR ≤(2000- 0.2*HDD)
3000
for 4000 ≤ HDD ≤ 7000
FDWR ≤ 0.20 for HDD > 7000
&
The skylight fenestration ≤
5% of gross roof area

NECB - THERMAL BRIDGING
THERMAL BRIDGING
37
CREATED BY
STRUCTURAL
MEMBERS
The thermal bridging effect of closely spaced
repetitive structural members (e.g. studs) and of
ancillary members (e.g. sill and plates) should be
taken into account.
The thermal bridging of major structural elements
that are parallel to the building envelope can be
ignored, provided that they do not increase the
thermal transmittance to more than twice than
permitted.
The thermal bridging of major structural elements
that must penetrate the building envelope need
not be taken into account, provided that the sum of
the areas is less than 2% of the above ground
building envelope.
Service equipment, shelf angle, ties and associate fasteners as well as minor
structural members need not be taken into account!!!

NECB PRESCRIPTIVE INSULATION
38
The prescriptive method requires:
4xW W
W
4xW

NECB PRESCRIPTIVEWALLS ABOVE GRADE
 No difference between residential
and non-residential
 No difference between the different
type of construction
39
Assemblies
Any Occupancy
R values (effective)
Walls 18 20.4 23 27 31
Roofs 25 31 31 35 40
Floors 25 31 31 35 40
Walls - mass 11.4
Walls - steel framed 15.6
Walls - wood framed 19.6
Roofs - insulation above 20.8
Roofs - attic 37.0

NECB PRESCRIPTIVE FENESTRATION AND DOORS
40
Components
U values (effective)
All Fenestration 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.28
All Doors 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.28
 No difference between residential and non-residential
 No difference between the different type of assemblies
 No SHGC requirements
 Exceptions:
 Skylights that represent < 2% of gross roof area can have a
thermal transmittance of no more than 0.60
 Doors that represent < 2% of gross wall area can have a
thermal transmittance of no more than 0.77
Non-metal 0.35
Metal framing (CW) 0.45
Metal framing (others) 0.55
Entrance doors 0.80
Skylights 0.58

NECB - PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD
41

NECB - TRADE-OFF METHODS
42
THERE ARE 2 TRADE-OFF PATHS:
Simple trade-off
calculations
Detailed trade-off path
Proposed Bldg
Envelope
Annual Energy
Consumption
Reference Bldg
Envelope energy
target
≤
Calculation are done using an energy
model with set requirements
≤
Proposed building
Reference building

NECB - DETAILED TRADE-OFF METHOD
THE DETAILED
METHOD
CONSISTS OF:
43
Same building size and shape, roof slope, and
building orientation for the proposed and
reference building
Same assumptions for space heating and cooling
Allowable fenestration and door areas in the
proposed building can be varied, while it is set per
the prescriptive requirements in the reference
building
Take into account thermal mass and SHGC
Air leakage and solar absorbance cannot be varied

COMPARISON OF 2 STANDARDS
44
ASHRAE 90.1 2010 NECB 2011
Mandatory
requirements
Yes, for all methods Not for energy modeling
Prescriptive
requirements
Generally less
demanding R values
Stringent, specific
• Framing Take into account Take into account
• Structure Not clear Specific (if this then…)
• Cladding attachments Take into account Some can be ignored
• Service penetrations Ignore Specific (if this then…)
• Walls More categories Less categories
• Fenestration & doors More categories Less categories
Trade-off methods Complex, no benefit if
FDWR <40%
Simple or software
Benefit if FDWR <40%

OVERALL
45
Prescriptive method, for
either standard, is for
simpler buildings
Trade-off method may get you the
desired result, but cannot do
anything for you when most of the
BE components are below

CONCLUSION REGARDING THE STANDARDS
 Wood frame is well suited for prescriptive but:
46
 New standards will generally require exterior insulation to meet the
max U-factor with 2x6 residential
 Only zone 4 in ASHRAE (but not in NEBC) could do without exterior
insulation in residential
 For non-combustible building, the prescriptive method is not a likely
candidate
 This is especially true for exposed concrete tower and buildings with
high window/wall ratio
 Exterior insulated assemblies can probably meet it but structure
penetrating through (balcony slabs, parapet, etc.) need to be taken into
account
 The trade-off methods is an option
 NECB simplified is the easiest but not necessarily best
 You need to have something to trade off with
 Glazing ratio has the biggest impact and it is hard to make up for it with
insulation

CONSIDERING THERMAL BRIDGING
Computer Modeling
Hand Calculations
 Series calculation method
 Parallel path calculation method
 Isothermal planes method
Lab Measurement
48

ACCEPTABLE CALCULATION METHODS
49
Construction Classes
Testing or
Modeling
Series
calculation
method
Parallel path
calculation
method
Isothermal
planes
method
Roofs
Insulation above deck P P
Attic (wood joists) P P
Attic (steel joists) P P
Walls
Mass P P
Steel framed P P
Wood framed P P

WHERE TO FIND INFORMATION
50
Resource material
ASHRAE 90.1
Appendix A

TABLES –WOOD FRAMED WALLS
51

TABLES – STEEL FRAMED WALLS
52

TABLES – MASS WALLS
53
If adding steel studs
with Batt , table 9.2B
can be used (as per
previous)

AREA WEIGHTED AVERAGE (SAME CLASS)
54
R1.25 for 9” slab edge
R15 for 8’3” wall
1
푅
=
0.75 × 1
1.25 + 8.25 × 1
15
9
푅 ≅ 7.8

L2,par
apet
Lro
of
HEAT LOSS
55

3D MODELING
 Time-transient dynamic 3D heat
56
transfer model that is capable of
accurately modeling:
 Complex geometries
 Radiation through air spaces
 Radiation to the interior and
exterior space
 Conduction of small areas of highly
thermal conductive materials
through larger areas of highly
insulating materials
 Calibrate the model using existing lab
testing

COMMON CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
58

CLADDING ATTACHMENTS
Horizontal Vertical Z-Girts Z-Girts Mixed Z-Girts Intermittent Z-Girts
59

EFFECT OF THERMAL BRIDGING IN 3D
60
NECB 2011
ASHRAE 90.1
2010
* Assembly does not include
any interior insulation but the
wall cavity and different
materials offer additional
insulating value.
*

Spray Foam
GLAZING SPANDREL AREAS
63
No Spray Foam

GLAZING SPANDREL AREAS
3.4
4.2
4.8 5.0
7.4
8.2
8.8 9.1
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Spandrel Section R Value
Back Pan Insulation
Detail 22 (Air in Stud Cavity) Detail 23 (Spray Foam in Stud Cavity)
64

CONSIDERING THERMAL BRIDGING
67
Resource
material
Building
Envelope
Thermal Bridging
Guide

BE THERMAL BRIDGING GUIDE
 ASHRAE 90.1 does not
68
address major thermal
bridges such as slab
edges, shelf angles,
parapets, flashings at
window perimeters, etc.
 In practice, these details
are largely overlooked.

WHAT IS THE GUIDE
69
 Started with AHSRAE 1635RP project
when linear transmittance got
introduced to North America
 BE Thermal Guide looked at over 400
details familiar to the BC MURB market
including:

CONCEPTUAL LEAP
70
Types of Transmittances
Clear Field Linear Point
o   U
psi chi

LINEAR TRANSMITTANCE
71
oQ Q sla b Q
Additional heat loss
due to the slab

OVERVIEW OF THE GUIDE
72
 Introduction
 Part 1 Building Envelope Thermal Analysis
(BETA) Guide
 Part 2 Energy and Cost Analysis
 Part 3 Significance, Insights, and Next Steps
 Appendix A Material Data Catalogue
 Appendix B Thermal Data Catalogue
 Appendix C Energy Modeling Analysis and Results
 Appendix D Construction Costs
 Appendix E Cost Benefit Analysis

HOW MUCH EXTRA LOST CAN DETAILS ADD?
 Standard 90.1 Prescriptive Requirements for Zone 5 Non-
75
Residential
 Mass Wall, U-0.090 or R-11.4 ci
 Steel-Framed Wall, U-0.064 or R-13 + R-7.5 ci
Mass wall with R-12 insulation inboard Steel stud with R-10 exterior insulation and horizontal
girts at 24”o.c and R-12 in the stud cavity

EXAMPLE BUILDING
 Mass Concrete Wall
76
 Exposed concrete slab
 Un-insulated concrete parapet
 Punched window in concrete
opening
 Steel-Framed Wall
 Exterior insulated structural steel
floor intersection
 Insulated steel stud parapet
 Punched window in steel stud
opening with perimeter flashing
 10 floors
 20% glazing
 No Balconies
 Standard details

IMPACT OF DETAILS
Transmittance Type
77
Mass Concrete Wall Exterior Insulated Steel Stud
Heat Loss
(BTU/hr oF)
% of Total
Heat Loss
(BTU/hr oF)
% of Total
Clear Wall 118 52 % 98 67 %
Slab 92 40% 24 17 %
Parapet 9 4% 4 3 %
Window transition 8 4% 19 13 %
Total 227 100 % 145 100 %

IMPACT OF DETAILS
Performance Metric
78
Mass Concrete Wall Exterior Insulated Steel Stud
ASHRAE
Prescriptive
Requirements
Overall
Performance
ASHRAE
Prescriptive
Requirements
Overall
Performance
U
(Btu/hrft2oF)
0.09 0.14 0.064 0.091
“Effective” R
(hr ft2 oF/BTU)
R-11 R-7 R-15.6 R-11
% Difference 44% 35%

IMPACT OF DETAILS
79
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
Additional Contribution to Space Heating Energy (GJ/m2 of Floor Area)
Clear Wall Only Including Poor Details Including Efficient Details
Details can
have a
greater
impact
More
Insulation is
not the silver
bullet

CONCLUSION
 Details such as slab
80
penetration are easy to
account for in calculation
 Codes do not yet take into
account details such as
window transitions
 It will likely become
increasingly more difficult to
ignore thermal bridging at
intersections of assemblies
 Move beyond simply adding
“more insulation”

MORRISON HERSHFIELD
CORPORATE PROFILE
PRESENTER AND CONTACT
SOPHIE MERCIER, P.ENG.
smercier@morrisonhershfield.com
604.454.2020

CORPORATE OVERVIEW
 Established in 1946
 MHGI = MHL + MHC
 Technical divisions
 16 offices across North America
 Over 750 employees
Our Vision
To be the first call for engineering
solutions that make a difference
82

MORRISON HERSHFIELD GROUP INC.
83
Morrison Hershfield Limited
Canada (580 staff)
Technical Divisions:
 Buildings & Facilities
 Infrastructure & Transportation
 Industrial
Offices:
 Vancouver, Victoria & Nanaimo, BC
 Calgary and Edmonton AB
 Toronto, Burlington and
Ottawa ON
 St. John’s, NL

MORRISON HERSHFIELD GROUP INC.
Morrison Hershfield Corporation
84
USA (120 staff)
Technical Divisions:
 Telecommunications
 Buildings & Facilities
Offices:
 Atlanta GA
 San Francisco CA
 Portland and Seattle OR
 Fort Lauderdale FL
 Raleigh NC

DIVISIONAL PROFILE - CANADA
85
Infrastructure & Transportation
 Roads & Highways
 Rail & Transit
 Transportation Structures
 Airport Development
 Water & Wastewater
Buildings & Facilities
 Building Envelope
 Mechanical / Electrical / Structural
Design
 Fire Protection & Life Safety
 Facility Assessment
 LEED & Sustainability
 Life Sciences
Industrial
 Telecommunications
 Data Centers
 Oil & Gas
 Power
 Forestry
Integrated
Multi-Disciplinary Bundles
 Public Private Partnerships
(MHP)
 Public Sector Projects
 Private Sector Projects
 Asset / Facility Managers
 Green / Sustainability (MH
Green)
 Energy
 Water and Wastewater

BUILDINGS & FACILTIIES
Building Envelope
 Condition Assessments / Testing
 Failure Analysis
 Design Development, New & Remedial
 Research & Development
 Investigation of Materials & Systems Performance
 Expert Engineering Advice
Facility Assessment & Management Planning
 Facility Condition Reviews & Technical Audits
 Maintenance Plans & Reserve Funds
 Due Diligence Evaluations
Life Sciences
 Laboratories, Pharmaceutical, Vivaria
 Healthcare and Wellness
LEED & Sustainability
 LEED Consulting
 Life Expectancy / Life Cycle Analysis
 Materials / Equipment Selection
 Design Review & Analysis
86
Mechanical / Electrical / Structural Design
 Concept, Detailed Design
 Condition Assessments
 Building Automation
 Electrical Cogeneration
 Utilities Master Plans
 Project Procurement / Tender Support
 Energy Management
Fire Protection & Life Safety
 Fire Protection Systems Design
 Code Consulting
 Plan Reviews & Inspections
 Hazard Evaluations

TRANSPORTATION
Roads & Highways
 Feasibility & Conceptual Design Studies
 Functional Planning & Detailed Design
 Traffic Modeling and Demand Forecasting
 Environmental Assessments and Public Consultation
 Construction Administration & Supervision
Rail & Transit
 Planning & Development
 Implementation & Operations
 Detailed Design
 Construction Management
Airport Development
 Area Development Planning & Feasibility Studies
 Contract Administration & Construction Supervision
 Testing & Commissioning
 Renewals Planning
87
Transportation Structures
 Conceptual, Preliminary & Detailed Design
 Restoration, Rehabilitation & Repair
 Cost / Benefit, Life Cycle & Constructability Analysis
 Bridge Inspections and Condition Surveys
 Contract Administration & Construction Inspection

INFRASTRUCTURE
88
Water & Waste Water
 Feasibility Studies, Pre-Design & Detailed Design
 Plant System Improvements
 Resident engineering
 Quality Control & Commissioning
Land Development
 Residential, Industrial and Commercial
 Institutional
 Golf Course Engineering
 Resort Development Engineering
Environment
 Environmental Planning
 Natural Sciences

INDUSTRIAL
89
Telecom
 Wireless
 Wireline
 Cable
 Broadcast
 Private Radio
Data Centers
 Internet Data Centers
 Enterprise Data Centers
 Municipalities, Universities,
Schools & Health Care
Oil & Gas
 Oil Sands
 Refineries
 Petrochemical Plants
 Secondary Manufacturing
Facilities
 Specialty Service Complexes
Power
 Primary Generation & Cogeneration
Plants
 Distributed Power Generation
 Overhead & Underground Power
Distribution
 Switch Gear & Transformer Yard
Development
Forestry
 Log Yards, Green Lumber &
Finished Lumber Yards
 OSB Mills
 Pulp Mills
 Saw Mills
 Specialty Facilities

SUSTAINABILITY
The Challenge
Sustainability is a top priority. Our collective challenge is to
significantly reduce our impact on the local and global environment and
begin to rebuild our natural capital in an economically and socially
responsible manner.
Our Commitment
To help clients understand
their environmental challenges
and to incorporate sustainable
design solutions to help them
meet these challenges.
90

THANK YOU
morrisonhershfield.com

2014 BCBC Envelope Compliance - ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à 2014 BCBC Envelope Compliance - ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB

Similaire à 2014 BCBC Envelope Compliance - ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

2014 BCBC Envelope Compliance - ASHRAE 90.1 and NECB

Notes de l'éditeur