High-rise Hypocrisy—“Greenest City” it Ain’t! Part 1
City Conversations we Should ALL be Having
February 2nd, 2022—Vancouver and BC Politicians and developers say high density high-rise is the only path to affordability, climate action and energy conservation. Scientists “say it ain’t so!”
High-rise proponents may not be thinking backwards, but the science makes it all go sideways
“City planners and politicians in Vancouver are just ignoring the science!” Paul said in exasperation. A retired Research Leader for Durability and Sustainability at FPInnovations, Paul applies his scientific approach method to whatever makes him passionate. And right now his focus is the folly that high-rise construction is Vancouver’s road to becoming one of the world’s “greenest cities.”
Paul is a member of the Fairview/South Granville Action Committee (FSGAC), a small but well-informed and growing group of folks voicing their opposition to the City’s Broadway Plan as well as a handful of proposed high-rises trying to sneak in before the plan is even considered by City Council in the spring of 2022. For those who don’t know it, the Broadway Plan proposes to make of our Broadway a forest of high-rises, 30,000 new homes designed to house 50,000 new residents over the coming decades. Never mind that the City’s population has historically grown at a rate of 1% per year (that’s about 7,000 new residents)—last year it actually shrank by that many folks. In any event, Paul has lots to say about the hypocrisy of “green” development that’s anything but.
“You don’t have to dig very deep,” Paul began, “to discover the fallacy of “green” high-rise development. In their 2019 report on the subject, entitled High-powered high-rise: The energy footprint disconnect of B.C.’s high-end condo dwellers, BC Hydro states: “Despite the suites in newer high-rise buildings often being marketed as energy-efficient and including things like LED lighting and ENERGY STAR® appliances, the combined electricity usage of the overall building is approximately two times more than high rises built in the 1980s, and almost four times more than low-rise buildings built that same decade.” I looked suitably aghast, asking, “Two to four times as much energy consumption—isn’t the city aware of this as they trumpet their Climate Emergency Action Plan?”
“Yes,” replied Paul, “the City is aware of this differential, having sponsored a 2014 study that concluded: “The energy performance of low-rise MURBs [multi-unit residential buildings] was 28% better than mid-rise MURBs and 22% better than high-rise MURBs.”
“Is this just a Vancouver or BC anomaly?” I asked.
“Not at all,” Paul responded. “If we look just south of the border at Seattle, which many would argue has a similar climate to ours, Seattle’s Office of Sustainability and the Environment found their residential high-rises have 60% higher energy use intensity than low-rise, and 45% more than mid rise, despite advances in energy efficiency.”
“Okay,” I thought about Paul speaking as one single scientist, “are there other academics or scientists, perhaps closer to home, who have the same concerns?”
“There sure are,” Paul answered. “We have to look no further than UBC Professor Patrick Condon, who says, "high-rise buildings are subject to the effects of too much sun and too much wind on their all-glass skins. And all-glass skins are, despite many improvements to the technology, inherently inefficient. Glass is simply not very good at keeping excessive heat out, or desirable heat in.”
Paul continued. “Then there’s the problem of heat loss through the edges and balconies of high-rises. Local building science experts, RDH Building Engineering, note “Thermal bridges caused by uninsulated concrete slab edges and balconies can reduce the effective R-value of full-height wall assemblies by up to 60%.” Translated into common language, that means many of the highly glazed high-rises we see around town are losing more than half their energy through the bits, bobs and balconies stuck onto their exteriors. This is not always accounted for in calculating the insulation capacity of these walls.”
He was on a bit of a roll, kept going: “RDH has also found, “Space-heating and total energy consumption in high-rise condominium MURBs appears to have increased over the past 30 to 40 years despite perceived improvements in energy efficiency.”
“Does this just mean we build badly here in BC, or are there other places either doing as badly as us, or having alternative approaches?” I was hesitant to ask this, feeling increasingly disconsolate about our built environment.
“There are alternative approaches,” Paul responded. “The UK’s Resource-Efficient Built Environment Lab model revealed in a recent 2021 study that “Increasing urban density without increasing urban height reduces life cycle GHG emissions while maximizing the population capacity.”
“So we can build build more density without always going up!” Now I was getting excited, or at least a bit less depressed, so Paul continued.
“Even Vancouver’s 2016 Zero Emissions Building Plan stated “Low-rise multi-unit residential buildings are the ideal building form and construction type for cost effective high performing building envelopes and ventilation systems.” To which UBC Professor Patrick Condon adds: “high-rise buildings are built largely of steel and concrete and are less sustainable than low rise and mid-rise buildings built largely of wood; steel and concrete produce a lot of GHG[Greenhouse Gase]. Wood traps it.”
“And we are a wood-producing province!” I picked up the thread. “I know of several developers who are building up to six storeys in wood-frame—of course, they’re doing it because it’s cheaper than concrete or steel, although they are happy to market it as more energy efficient, which it is.”
“I agree 100%,” answered Paul. “Despite all the opposing science, the Broadway Plan is proposing up to 40-storey buildings around Skytrain stations, up to 30 storeys along the rest of Broadway and up to 25 storeys scattered as far south as 16th Avenue and north all the way to 6th Avenue.”
“I feel there’s much more to this than a single conversation,” I concluded. “Can we continue the discussions?”
“By all means,” Paul answered. “I’d like to include another FSGAC member, environmental engineer José Bicudo. He’s looked at several other sources of scientific information about high-rise building performance—full disclosure, his findings are if anything more troubling than mine.”
“Bring it on!” I answered. “City staff are proposing to bring the Broadway Plan to City Council pretty soon—we have little time to lose!”
Brian Palmquist is a fully vaccinated Vancouver-based architect, building envelope and building code consultant and LEED Accredited Professional (the first green building system). He is semi-retired for the moment, still teaching and writing, so not beholden to any client or city hall. These conversations mix real discussion with research and observations based on a 40+ year career including the planning, design and construction of almost every type and scale of project. He is the author of the Amazon best seller “An Architect’s Guide to Construction.” He is also a member of team for a livable Vancouver, a new political party dedicated to restoring a livable Vancouver starting with the 2022 civic election.
I would love to share our story with you Brian. We live in a high-rise at UBC. We bought on the promise of a place that would be highly energy efficient but it is just the opposite! We were seriously duped! Even the UBC board of governors promised our building would be a star performer in terms of energy savings. They were not going ‘permit’ anything less.
We use more power in our 2 bedroom condo than we did in our 3 storey wood frame 110 year old house with single pane windows just a few blocks off campus! It was occupied by up to 6 people while here in the condo it is just the 2 of us.
High rises have no charm. I think Vancouver should look to the policies of Paris or even Washington DC. Thanks Brian for your very interesting writing. It makes sense.