Newly built home efficiency
⌂ All tools ↳ Retrofit Explorer
EnerGuide data

How efficient are Canada's new homes?

As-built EnerGuide evaluations of newly constructed Canadian houses. Pick a province and postal area — or browse the whole country — to see energy-code tiers, airtightness, how new homes are heated, and whether they perform as designed.

The national picture

Before you narrow down: how the provinces compare on take-up, on how new homes are heated, and on how they perform. This section always shows the whole country — the filters below it do not change it.

Provincial scorecard

Every postal area, five ways

Each postal area with enough as-built evaluations, coloured by the metric you pick. Click a leaderboard row to load that area into the explorer below.

A note on the ERS rating — resolved

ERSRating is 0 on 12.9% of the new-construction records that carry the field (14,151 of 109,827), and 94% of those homes have a modelled EUI above 60 kWh/m²/yr — so the zero was never reporting a net-zero house. We had flagged this as an open question; the data answers it. Those files are rated on the older EnerGuide 0–100 scale instead, and the two scales are mutually exclusive per record: 96.3% of the ERSRating = 0 rows carry a real EGHRating (median 82), against 0.2% of the rows with a genuine GJ/yr rating.

It is a vintage artifact, not a regional one and not a plan-file one. Every evaluation up to 2015 is on the old scale; the share falls through the changeover — 86% in 2016, 45% in 2017, 16% in 2018, 5% in 2019 — and settles near 0.5% from 2023 on. So the provincial spread (29.4% in Ontario and 19.9% in Nova Scotia against 1.5% in New Brunswick and 0.2% in PEI) is tracking how old each province's file mix is, not a difference in rating practice. The design-side Designed_ERSRating carries the same placeholder on the same files, so plan-only submissions are not the dividing line either. The small residual after 2023 carries no EGHRating either — genuinely missing.

Every ERS figure on this page now reads that 0 as no rating rather than as a value. The clearest case was T2Z in Calgary, whose median ERSRating read 0 across 1,460 homes with a median EUI of 149: only 56 of those homes had a non-null rating, and 44 of the 56 were the placeholder. Excluding it, T2Z's median is 96 GJ/yr. ERS is still left off the map above, which ranks postal areas on quantities every file carries — the GJ/yr scale only covers the post-2019 share of each area's records.

new homes in this view

How efficient are new homes here?

The typical newly built, as-built-tested home across every record in this view.

Climbing the code tiers

Canada's National Building Code sets tiered energy-performance levels (Tier 1 = base code, Tier 5 = net-zero-ready). As the code ratchets up, new builds are being pushed higher up the ladder.

NBC 9.36 energy-performance tier, by year built

Each bar is one year of newly built homes, split by the energy tier they achieved. Tiers were only recorded on evaluations from 2024 on, so earlier years are sparse. Higher tiers (darker green) use progressively less energy than base code.

NBC tier: designed vs achieved

The whole tier mix, before and after. Homes that beat their design tier outnumber those that fall short by more than ten to one — much of that is plan files filed at Tier 0 or 1 that test far better once the blower door goes in.

Getting tighter every year

Air leakage is one of the clearest signs of build quality. Both audits carry a figure: the plan file's modelled value, and the blower-door result on the finished house. Lower is tighter.

Median airtightness, as designed vs as built (ACH₅₀)

Median across all new homes evaluated that year. Both lines are falling, and the gap between them has held: builders keep beating the value their plan model assumed.

The airtightness gap, per home (as-built − design, ACH₅₀)

Negative (green) = the finished house tested tighter than its plan model assumed; positive (red) = leakier.

Read the design figure as an assumption, not a measurement. Most plan files carry a round default value — 3.6, 4.5 and 2.5 ACH₅₀ account for most of them — rather than a per-house target, so this compares what the model assumed against what the house actually tested.

Distribution of as-built airtightness (ACH₅₀)

Blower-door result across every as-built home in this view — not the design/build gap shown above, just how tight the finished houses actually are.

How new homes are insulated

Insulation level, by building component, across every as-built home in this view — shown in R-value, the imperial unit most commonly quoted in Canada (R = RSI × 5.68).

Insulation levels by component (R-value)
Roof / attic
Wall
Foundation
Exposed floor

Unlike airtightness, insulation levels are essentially fixed at the design stage — they rarely move between the plan file and the finished house.

Do they perform as designed?

Every new home is modelled twice: once from the plans (as designed) and again after it's built and blower-door tested (as built). Comparing the two shows whether the finished house lives up to its design. Both sides are shown as energy use intensity — total modelled energy ÷ floor area — so homes of different sizes compare on the same scale.

As-designed vs as-built EUI (kWh/m²/yr)

Each point is a home (or, province-wide, a cluster of homes): horizontal = its design EUI, vertical = its as-built EUI. On or below the dashed line means the finished home matched or beat its design. Lower = less energy.

The design gap, per home (as-built − as-designed, kWh/m²/yr)

Negative (green) = the finished home tested better than its design model; positive (red) = worse. Most homes cluster at or just below zero.

Energy & emissions of a new home

How much energy a typical new home is modelled to use, and the greenhouse gases that come with it.

Energy use intensity — EUI (kWh/m²/yr)

Total modelled annual energy ÷ floor area. Lower is more efficient. Values above 400 kWh/m²/yr are clipped for scale.

Greenhouse-gas emissions (tonnes CO₂e/yr)

Modelled annual operating emissions. The cluster near zero is electrically heated homes on low-carbon grids; the hump to the right is gas-heated homes.

What's being built, and how it's heated

The mix of house types, heating fuels, and sizes among newly built homes — and how the fuel mix is shifting over time.

Common heat pump models (outdoor unit)

Top 5 most common outdoor heat-pump units installed in as-built new homes in this view, grouped by brand + outdoor model number. Each line shows heating capacity at 47°F and 5°F outdoor temperature, HSPF2 (seasonal heating efficiency), COP at 5°F, and cold-climate status where on file — click the AHRI number for its directory page. Only certificate numbers that resolve in the AHRI directory are counted: on new construction 79% of non-empty HPAHRI values are a literal 0, and a further 540 installs carry a number with no certificate behind it.

House type
Primary heating fuel
How new homes are heated, by year built

Share of new homes each year by primary heating fuel. Gas still dominates most new construction; watch the electricity share for signs of electrification.

Floor area of new homes (m²)

The most efficient new homes

The 20 lowest-EUI as-built homes in this view — real houses, not a hypothetical best case.

Top 20 by energy use intensity (kWh/m²/yr)
#EUIAreaHouse typeYear builtFloor areaHeating fuelHeat pump

Ranked by measured EUI, lowest first, within the current filters — click a row for insulation, airtightness, tier and heating-equipment detail. A handful of very small or unusual homes can post extreme low values, so read this list alongside the median above, not as a substitute for it.

How this works, in plain language

This tool uses Natural Resources Canada's open EnerGuide home-energy-evaluation data, filtered to new-construction homes rather than the renovations shown on the Retrofit Explorer. Each row is one real, finished house that was tested after it was built. Where the same house also has a design-stage evaluation on file, that's shown alongside so you can see whether the house performed as designed.

The energy figures are modelled estimates from the evaluation software, not a utility bill — actual use varies with weather and how a house is lived in. Some charts (EnerGuide rating, building-code performance tier) only exist for homes evaluated in the last few years, because those measures are newer; older charts (airtightness, heating fuel, floor area) go back to 2004. There's no cost data in the source, so no dollar figures are shown anywhere on this page. New construction is a much smaller program than retrofits — about 223,000 homes here versus 500,000+ retrofits — and participation is voluntary and uneven across provinces, with Alberta, B.C. and Ontario making up most of it. Small postal areas can look noisy for that reason; read them as an indication, not a precise measurement.

Advanced methodology — fields, evaluation types & caveats

The source

Natural Resources Canada's EnerGuide Rating System open data — the same dataset behind the Retrofit Explorer, but a different slice of it. Every evaluation carries a type code: D/E are existing-home pre/post-retrofit audits (the Retrofit Explorer's subject), while P and N are new construction. P ("plan") is the home modelled from its architectural plans; N is the finished house, evaluated and blower-door tested after construction.

What a "home" is here

Each row is one as-built (N) home. Where the matching plan file (P) exists for the same home, its as-designed figures are joined on so the two can be compared ("Do they perform as designed?"). Homes with only a plan file — designed but not yet built or tested — are excluded.

Designed vs as-built

Three figures are carried on both audits, so the plan model and the finished house can be compared directly: the EnerGuide rating, the NBC energy-performance tier (ENERGYPERFORMANCETIER, recorded on P and N files alike) and airtightness (AIR50P). The tier comparison is a true before/after — both numbers are the software's own verdict on each model. The airtightness comparison is not symmetric: the as-built value is a real blower-door measurement, while most plan files carry a round assumed value (3.6, 4.5 and 2.5 ACH₅₀ between them cover most of the dataset) rather than a per-house design target. Treat it as assumption versus measurement.

The numbers

Energy figures are modelled estimates from the audit software (HOT2000), not metered utility bills. The EnerGuide rating and NBC tier were only introduced in recent software versions, so those charts start in 2019 (rating) and 2024 (tiers); airtightness, fuel and floor area go back to 2004. Province-wide charts are pre-computed in Python; the postal-area view bins the raw records in your browser using the same bucket widths, so the two agree. Geography is postal-area (FSA) only — the public dataset carries just the first three characters of each postal code. The source contains no cost data, so no dollar figures are shown.

NBC tier coverage varies by province

Tier coverage is effectively zero in Ontario and Québec — ON has 0 tiered evaluations out of 70,568, QC 1 out of 2,577, versus 25% in Alberta and 22% in B.C. Both provinces regulate new-construction energy performance under their own codes rather than the NBC tier ladder, so ENERGYPERFORMANCETIER arrives blank there. This is a source gap, not a pipeline fault. Below a minimum count of tiered evaluations, the tier charts are suppressed and replaced with an explanation rather than showing a misleading one- or two-bar distribution.

New construction is a smaller programme than retrofits (~223,000 as-built homes vs 500,000+ retrofits), and participation is voluntary and uneven across provinces — Alberta, BC and Ontario dominate. Small postal areas can be noisy; read them as indications, not precise measurements.

Full pipeline, field list and change log: NEWHOMES.md ↗.

Sources