When applying for energy funding in Canada, the energy model is often treated as a checkbox.
It gets built, included in the application, and used to estimate savings.
But in reality, the model is not just supporting the project. It is driving the entire financial case.
If the model is wrong, the savings are wrong.
And if the savings are wrong, the funding decision is built on a shaky foundation.
Funding Decisions Are Based on Projected Savings
Programs across Canada, including those supported by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), rely on projected energy savings to evaluate projects.
Those projections determine:
- whether a project qualifies
- how much funding is awarded
- whether the investment makes sense
All of that comes back to one thing:
The energy model.
The Problem: Most Energy Models Are Not Built for Accuracy
In practice, many models are created to meet a requirement, not to reflect reality.
They often rely on:
- assumed operating schedules
- estimated plug and process loads
- simplified ventilation assumptions
- default system performance
The model runs. The report looks clean. The savings appear reasonable.
But that does not mean the results are accurate.
Even small differences in assumptions can shift results significantly, especially when evaluating multiple energy conservation measures.
What Happens When the Model Is Off
When a model is not grounded in actual building performance, several things start to break down:
