Our Progress | QuadReal

ENERGY DISCLOSURE

Energy disclosure is important because it allows us to track our performance and identify opportunities for improvement. This page includes the performance metrics of all our Canadian buildings and four case studies that illustrate how we use analytics to keep learning and pushing further.

We believe in a transparent marketplace. You will find our energy, water and carbon emissions data (shown as greenhouse gases (GHG) intensity) for office and residential properties on the map below (also available on the leasing pages). This is a way of tracking a building’s carbon emissions over time. We encourage the industry to share benchmarked data and make a commitment to transparency, sustainability leadership and combating climate change.

This is our 5-step guide to energy disclosure.

WHERE WE ARE NOW

In Canada, buildings consume 22% of total energy and generate 17% of the country’s emissions.

ENERGY BENCHMARKING

This is a way of tracking a building’s energy use and carbon emissions over time, comparing performance relative to similar buildings.

INFORMATION = POWER!

Tracking energy use helps building owners improve efficiency and reduce emissions.

WE ARE CLEAR ABOUT DATA

QuadReal has taken the step to be transparent about benchmarked data for our office and residential portfolio in Canada.

BETTER TOGETHER

QuadReal encourages the industry to share benchmarked data and make a commitment to transparency, sustainability leadership and combating climate change.

BUILDING PERFORMANCE

We participate in the Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB). This is an international assessment that allows us to compare and continuously improve our performance relative to our past performance and to our peers. Over 95% of our Canadian portfolio has a green certification and our property teams set annual energy reduction targets. This process has helped us stay on track to achieve our 2020 goal of reducing absolute carbon emissions by 50% compared to the 2007 baseline year.

Explore the interactive map to learn more about our buildings and their performance.

OUR PROGRESS IS A PATH OF CONTINUOUS LEARNING

We believe it is important for us to provide a complete and transparent picture of QuadReal’s performance. Tools like our Environmental Management System (EMS) are utilized to guide portfolio-wide operational improvements. The design, management and maintenance of the EMS undergo continual improvement to ensure we reach our goals. We are certified in accordance with ISO 14001. View our 2019-2022 certificate.

Please see our 2021 performance update which uses all the real estate management metrics of Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) to enable easy comparison to other firms. QuadReal has chosen to voluntarily disclose our Canadian portfolio emissions data in accordance with the GHG Protocol and in addition to SASB metrics. See our GHG emissions methodology.

These charts on carbon emissions, energy intensity, waste diversion and water normalization demonstrate the analysis we undertake, and the actionable insights generated. The rich data and critical analysis help us avoid incorrect assumptions and inaction. Our curiosity continues to drive innovation that supports sustainability.

CARBON WATERFALL

Challenge:
We wanted to know how to drive an 80% absolute carbon emission reduction in our growing portfolio.

See text description

QuadReal GHG Emissions - 2017 vs. 2007	Absolute Emissions (tCO2e)	Cumulative Emissions (tCO2e)	Percent Difference	Description
2007 Total	259,630	259,630	0	Total greenhouse gas emissions of QuadReal’s portfolio in 2007, including emissions resulting from energy, water and waste consumption at the properties we manage.
Grid Intensity	-49,986	209,645	-19	The Grid Intensity describes how much GHG emissions are associated with the electrical grid in a province. It changes in-line with the mix of energy generation in that province in a given year, with coal generation being highly carbon intensive versus hydro, nuclear, wind and solar being low carbon sources of electricity generation.
Developments	31,936	241,580	12	GHG emissions that are added to the portfolio through new property developments.
Normalization	-7,778	233,803	-3	In order to compare buildings across regions and across years, the energy and emissions have been normalized for weather, occupancy and exceptional tenant loads. By removing these variables we get a clearer sense of the energy performance of buildings that we can affect through operations and capital improvements.
RECs & Offsets	-40,265	193,537	-16	In line with the accounting principles of LEED and the GHG Protocol, some of our properties purchase Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) and Verified Emissions Reductions (VERs) in order to reduce their GHG emissions. These purchases financially reward clean energy projects and make the business case viable for the construction of more wind projects and methane capture from projects. We retire the GHG emissions and it is tracked through third-party audited certification such as Green-e.
Operations	-30,026	163,511	-12	A reduction in GHG emissions due to operational excellence and energy conservation projects.
2017 Total	163,511	327,022	-37	Total GHG emissions of QuadReal’s portfolio in 2017 including emissions resulting from energy, water and waste consumption at the properties we manage.

Insights:
Energy efficiency is necessary; best-in-class operations teams and capital upgrades are key to driving progress. However, efficiency plays only a small part in overall reduction when compared to fuel switching, grid intensity changes, new developments and renewable energy. To achieve our ambitious goal, we need the entire real estate sector to innovate and deliver low-carbon solutions.

Actions:
Existing properties set and deliver on energy targets every year. In the case of new developments, we are embedding sustainability early in the design phase to encourage integration of healthy spaces, smart technology and low carbon alternatives such as renewable energy systems.

ENERGY INTENSITY FOR OFFICE

Challenge:
We wanted to understand how buildings can age gracefully. In the graph below, the size of the bubble corresponds to the size of the office building (in Ft²).

See text description

Energy Use Intensity [kWh / Ft²]	Year Built	Gross Living Area (Ft²)	Province
28.42	2013	22,823	British Columbia
48.26	2013	33,530	Alberta
9.9	1988	39,576	Ontario
20.75	1974	50,200	Ontario
22.65	1975	50,953	Ontario
24.86	1974	51,018	Ontario
18.82	1975	52,460	Ontario
27.08	1972	53,548	Alberta
31.46	2009	61,138	Alberta
15.04	2001	61,169	Ontario
22.13	1976	69,669	Ontario
7.77	2010	72,973	Ontario
18.71	2010	78,445	British Columbia
48.26	2013	33,530	Alberta
46.91	1968	85,994	Alberta
26.61	1987	91,820	Ontario
17.39	1992	93,121	Ontario
21.26	1985	94,909	Ontario
16.42	1982	95,775	Ontario
20.68	1984	95,840	Ontario
26.84	1988	101,434	Ontario
21.55	1985	106,753	Alberta
57.61	1987	112,378	Ontario
16.99	2002	112,412	British Columbia
14.93	2010	112,933	British Columbia
20.51	2008	113,041	British Columbia
27.91	1990	113,553	Ontario
18.99	2007	125,789	Ontario
14.64	2011	126,807	Ontario
36.08	1979	129,686	Alberta
22.09	2002	146,560	British Columbia
50.15	1968	150,692	British Columbia
29.87	2013	157,066	Alberta
27.19	2012	172,798	British Columbia
14.59	2006	178,508	Ontario
15.5	2014	194,737	Alberta
29.87	2013	157,066	Alberta
25.46	1980	226,747	British Columbia
21.16	2000	251,004	Ontario
27.07	1969	348,007	British Columbia
26.54	1991	364,486	Ontario
14.61	2015	400,755	British Columbia
27.96	1980	464,497	Alberta
25.26	1983	471,929	Ontario
19.77	2012	592,923	Ontario
20.34	1984	593,849	British Columbia
37.39	1972	641,377	Ontario
30.53	1988	653,723	Alberta
18.35	2014	709,412	Ontario
35.63	1989	722,652	British Columbia
24.98	2009	786,775	Alberta
23.84	2007	844,228	Alberta
32.08	1983	1,097,655	Alberta
35.78	1972	1,962,036	Ontario

Insights:
With the adoption of LEED and other certifications, the operating performance of new buildings has rapidly improved in the last decade. It is clear that operational best practices and proactive capital upgrades are key to closing the gap for older buildings. Ambitious and innovative changes are also necessary to keep up with growing energy performance expectations.

Actions:
We aim to make our office buildings smart-ready so that we can collect interval data and make use of operational analytics and retro-commissioning.

WASTE DIVERSION VS. COST PER SQUARE FOOT

Challenge:
We wanted to know how to increase waste diversion rates.

See text description

Building	Annual Cost per Square Foot ($)	Annual Diversion Rate (%)	Waste Intensity (kg/ft²)
Bldg 1	0.13	72	11
Bldg 2	0.16	60	9
Bldg 3	0.12	60	10
Bldg 4	0.08	70	5
Bldg 5	0.19	75	9
Bldg 6	0.12	60	10
Bldg 7	0.4	33	94
Bldg 8	0.06	50	13
Bldg 9	0.07	63	10

_{R² = 0.11 The r-squared of cost vs. diversion rate is 0.11. Roughly meaning that very little of the difference in cost is correlated to diversion rate.}

Insights:
Waste diversion rates and cost per square foot are not correlated. In fact, what we found is that the most economical cost-per-square-foot buildings had the highest waste diversion rates, while the highest cost-per-square-foot buildings significantly underperformed in comparison.

Actions:
We created an internal waste target-setting process for all buildings. It established a baseline across regions and asset classes and included initiatives to improve performance. We also conducted waste audits and provided support to buildings that were underperforming. Waste volumes were reduced by half in the first month through extensive training and clear communications with operators, cleaners and tenants with a focus on those in food and beverage. This waste diversion process and the reduced frequency of pickups provided significant cost savings for these properties.

HOW NOW WITH WATER?

Challenge:
We wanted to know how to compare water usage performance by building so that we could identify effective processes and technologies while identifying which buildings needed additional attention.

See text description

Month	Normalized (L/ft²)	Non Normalized (L/ft²)
Jan 2014	39.25	42.56
Feb 2014	39.24	42.58
Mar 2014	39.14	42.49
Apr 2014	38.89	42.26
May 2014	38.68	41.66
Jun 2014	38.41	41.76
Jul 2014	38.4	40.87
Aug 2014	38.2	40.34
Sep 2014	37.76	40.2
Oct 2014	37.28	39.58
Nov 2014	36.91	39.25
Dec 2014	36.65	39.01
Jan 2015	36.1	38.61
Feb 2015	35.57	38.23
Mar 2015	35.26	38.22
Apr 2015	34.58	37.87
May 2015	33.32	37.6
Jun 2015	32.71	36.43
Jul 2015	30.94	35.87
Aug 2015	30.31	35.9
Sep 2015	28.98	35.89
Oct 2015	28.37	35.65
Nov 2015	28.2	35.93
Dec 2015	28.02	36.17
Jan 2016	28.06	36.51
Feb 2016	28.19	36.89
Mar 2016	27.97	36.8
Apr 2016	27.88	36.8
May 2016	27.89	36.66
Jun 2016	27.39	37.35
Jul 2016	26.59	37.29
Aug 2016	25.4	37.74
Sep 2016	25.27	37.44
Oct 2016	24.93	37.48
Nov 2016	24.92	37.41
Dec 2016	24.84	37.31
Jan 2017	24.91	37.36
Feb 2017	25	37.42
Mar 2017	24.95	37.35
Apr 2017	24.7	37.26
May 2017	25.01	36.87
Jun 2017	25.26	36.73
Jul 2017	26.16	36.62
Aug 2017	27.59	36.11
Sep 2017	27.77	36.12
Oct 2017	27.86	36.36
Nov 2017	28.06	36.5
Dec 2017	27.97	36.4
Jan 2018	28.18	36.6
Feb 2018	27.97	36.39
Mar 2018	28.22	36.63
Apr 2018	28.62	36.8
May 2018	28.16	37.42
Jun 2018	27.95	37.31
Jul 2018	28.26	38.57
Aug 2018	28.28	39.97
Sep 2018	28.97	40.73
Oct 2018	29.16	40.52

Insights:
We worked with RealPAC and Energy Profiles Limited to beta test a water normalization methodology that will help us see how water use is changing over the years independent of the weather. This will highlight which buildings are more efficient and why. In this example, water intensity was largely maintained despite a large increase in the number of building occupants.

Actions:
Water normalization is live at all our office properties and we are working on implementing it at our residential properties. In addition to weather and exceptional water use normalization, we are developing a normalization for occupancy that will allow us to better understand the data and water use across the portfolio.

Learn more about Our Actions