CIPI: Assessing the financial impacts of extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles on public buildings in Ontario

For more information click here for the Costing Climate Change to Public Infrastructure portal.

1 | Introduction and context

In June 2019, a Member of Provincial Parliament asked the FAO to analyze the costs that climate change impacts could impose on Ontario’s provincial and municipal infrastructure, and how those costs could impact the long-term budget outlook of the province. In response to this request, the FAO launched its Costing Climate Change Impacts to Public Infrastructure project (CIPI).

In the first two phases of the project, the FAO assessed the composition and state of repair of provincial and municipal infrastructure, with findings released in November 2020 and in August 2021. This report is the first of three sector reports that present the climate change costing results in the final phase of the project.

Figure 1-1 CIPI project structure and timeline

Source: FAO.

This report examines the impacts of changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles on the long-term costs of maintaining public buildings in a state of good repair. The project’s context, methodology and data sources are described in the FAO’s CIPI project backgrounder and methodology report.[1] Detailed information on the engineering aspects of the CIPI project can be found in WSP’s report.[2] Additional costing results and data downloads can be found on the FAO website.

2 | Summary

Ontario’s provincial and municipal governments own a large portfolio of public buildings and facilities

The FAO estimates that Ontario’s provincial and municipal governments currently own and manage about $254 billion[3] of public buildings and facilities. These assets include hospitals, schools, colleges, administration buildings, correctional facilities, courthouses, transit facilities, social housing, tourism, culture and sport facilities, as well as potable, storm water and wastewater facilities.

Keeping assets in a state of good repair helps to maximize the benefits of public infrastructure in the most cost-effective manner over time. This requires annual operations and maintenance (O&M) spending, as well as intermittent capital spending either to rehabilitate part(s) of an asset or to fully renew it at the end of its service life. The cost of maintaining Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings and facilities in a state of good repair would be around $10.1 billion[4] per year on average, totalling about $799 billion over the rest of the 21st century (2022-2100).[5] These projected “baseline costs” are what would have occurred in a stable climate.

Climate change will have a significant impact on the cost of maintaining public buildings in the absence of adaptation

To ensure safety and reliability, public infrastructure is designed, built and maintained to withstand a specific range of climate conditions typically based on historic climate data. However, extreme rainfall and extreme heat are projected to become more frequent and intense, while shorter winters will somewhat lower the annual number of freeze-thaw cycles. Taken together, the FAO estimates these hazards will add roughly $6 billion to the costs of maintaining public buildings and facilities in a state of good repair over the remainder of this decade (2022-2030).

Over the long term, the extent of global climate change will influence the severity of these climate hazards and their impacts to public buildings. In a medium emissions scenario,[6] the cumulative cost of maintaining the existing portfolio of public buildings in a state of good repair will increase by $66 billion (8.2 per cent increase over baseline), or $0.8 billion per year on average over the rest of the 21st century. However, in a high emissions scenario,[7] cumulative costs would increase by $116 billion (14.5 per cent increase over baseline), or $1.5 billion per year on average over the rest of the century. These results reflect higher capital expenses from accelerated deterioration and higher O&M expenses.

Figure 2-1 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions

Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

Adapting public buildings to withstand these climate hazards will require significant investment

To explore the financial implications of adapting Ontario’s public buildings to withstand extreme rainfall and extreme heat,[8] the FAO costed two adaptation approaches: a reactive strategy and a proactive strategy.

The reactive strategy assumes public buildings are rebuilt to withstand late-century projections of extreme rainfall and extreme heat when they are replaced at the end of their service life, with 77 per cent of public buildings adapted by 2100.[9] Reactively adapting Ontario’s public buildings to withstand extreme rainfall and heat in the medium emissions scenario would cost an additional $52 billion (6.5 per cent over baseline) cumulatively to 2100, while adapting to climate conditions in the high emissions scenario would instead cost $91 billion (11.4 per cent over baseline).

The proactive strategy assumes most public buildings are retrofitted before the end of their service lives to withstand late-century projections of extreme rainfall and extreme heat, and nearly all assets are adapted by 2060. Proactively adapting this portfolio to withstand extreme rainfall and heat in the medium emissions scenario would cost an additional $54 billion (6.7 per cent over baseline) cumulatively to 2100, while adapting to climate conditions in the high emissions scenario would instead cost $104 billion (13.1 per cent over baseline).[10]

Adaptation will modestly lower the direct financial costs to provincial and municipal governments of maintaining public buildings over the long term

The financial impact of these climate hazards will be material to the province and municipalities regardless of which asset management strategy is pursued. However, this study only includes a narrow range of financial costs directly related to maintaining public buildings and facilities in a state of good repair. The societal costs of planned and unplanned service disruptions were beyond the scope of this report but would be significant.[11] These impacts would be much more significant for buildings that are not adapted.

Even within the narrow range of cost impacts analyzed in this report, the costs to governments in the adaptation strategies are modestly lower than the no adaptation strategy.[12] The comparative benefits of adaptation would be more significant if the indirect costs were incorporated.

Figure 2-2 The long-term cumulative costs of maintaining Ontario’s public buildings are modestly lower when adaptation actions are taken

Notes: The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

Determining the most cost-effective strategy for an individual asset would require comparing the costs of different adaptation strategies over its service life, for a broader range of climate hazards and societal costs, and with the asset’s specific circumstances taken into consideration. While the portfolio level costing results in this report are not intended to inform asset-specific management decisions, the results show that changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will carry significant budgetary impacts for the province and Ontario’s municipalities.

3 | The long-term costs of maintaining public buildings

This chapter presents the scope of public buildings and facilities considered in this report, followed by a discussion of the costs necessary to maintain these assets in a state of good repair. Next, the chapter estimates the long-term infrastructure costs required to maintain Ontario’s buildings and facilities in a state of good repair to 2100 under a stable climate. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a baseline projection of infrastructure costs. In later chapters, this baseline is then be compared to projections that account for certain climate change hazards.

Ontario has a large portfolio of public buildings and facilities

This report focuses on buildings and facilities owned and controlled by provincial and municipal governments. The FAO estimates that the current replacement value[13] (CRV) of these assets is $254 billion in 2022, representing roughly 42 per cent of the total infrastructure examined within the CIPI project.[14]

Public buildings and facilities valued at $141 billion (55 per cent) are owned by the provincial government, while the remaining $113 billion (45 per cent) are owned by Ontario’s municipalities.[15] Provincial assets include:

  • hospitals
  • schools
  • colleges
  • government office buildings
  • correctional facilities and courthouses
  • transit facilities

Municipal assets include:

  • social housing
  • government administration buildings
  • tourism buildings and facilities
  • culture, recreation, and sport facilities
  • potable water, storm water and wastewater management buildings and facilities
  • transit facilities

Figure 3-1 Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings has a Current Replacement Value of $254 billion

Note: CRV estimates are in real 2020 billion dollars. Percentage values refer to a sector’s share of total CRV.

Source: FAO.

Maintaining a large portfolio of buildings requires significant spending

Keeping assets in a state of good repair helps to maximize the benefits of public infrastructure in the most cost-effective manner over time. To be maintained in a state of good repair, assets require annual operations and maintenance (O&M) spending, as well as intermittent capital spending either to rehabilitate[16] an asset or renew it at the end of its service life.[17]

The age and condition of public buildings in Ontario’s portfolio vary significantly. To project the costs of maintaining public buildings in a state of good repair, the FAO gathered and estimated asset-specific information on age, condition and current replacement value, as well as the general performance standards used to evaluate if an asset is in a state of good repair. Using an infrastructure deterioration model based on modelling techniques developed by the Ontario Ministry of Infrastructure,[18] the FAO projected the capital and operating expenses necessary to maintain the current portfolio[19] of public buildings in a state of good repair to 2100.

These long-term O&M, rehabilitation and renewal spending estimates form the baseline projection against which the climate change costing scenarios developed in later chapters will be compared. The baseline projection represents the infrastructure costs that would have been required to maintain public buildings in a stable climate.[20]

While O&M expenses occur annually, the timing of rehabilitation and renewal expenses depends on a building’s age and condition. Figure 3-2 shows the annual proportion of Ontario’s public buildings (by CRV) that would require rehabilitation or renewal spending over the rest of this century if the funding necessary to bring and maintain the current portfolio of public buildings into a state of good repair were made available and spent in a timely manner.[21] On average, around six per cent of buildings will require rehabilitation or renewal every year.

Figure 3-2 Proportion of public buildings requiring rehabilitation or renewal each year

Source: FAO.

$799 billion needed to maintain public buildings until 2100 in a stable climate

Bringing Ontario’s existing suite of public buildings into a state of good repair and maintaining them until 2100 would cost $799 billion cumulatively in a stable climate, or an average of about $10 billion per year. This baseline cost includes $296 billion in cumulative O&M expense and $503 billion in rehabilitation and renewal expense to 2100.

The costs to maintain public buildings in a state of good repair reflect both the value of assets owned, as well as the condition, age and performance standards of each individual asset under management. For example, assets in poorer condition require more capital spending to bring them into a state of good repair. Likewise, older assets must be renewed sooner than newer assets.

Figure 3-3 The cumulative cost of maintaining Ontario's public buildings and facilities in a state of good repair to 2100 in a stable climate

Note: All values presented in real 2020 dollars.

Source: FAO.

4 | The cost of key climate hazards to public buildings

Climate change is associated with many hazards to public infrastructure, which can take the form of extreme weather events or long-term chronic impacts, that affect asset deterioration. Ontario has been subject to costly floods and ice storms and is also prone to droughts, intense rainfall, wildfires, windstorms, heatwaves and permafrost melt.[22] This project focuses on only three climate hazards – extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles – as they were determined to have broad and financially material impacts to public infrastructure and can be projected with a reasonable degree of scientific confidence.[23]

This chapter summarizes how projected changes in these climate hazards would impact Ontario’s public buildings in the absence of adaptation measures. It then presents the FAO’s estimates of the additional long-term costs these climate hazards would impose on Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings in medium and high emissions scenarios.

Extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles

To ensure safety and reliability, infrastructure is designed, built and maintained to withstand a specific range of climate conditions typically based on historic climatic loads.[24] However, extreme rainfall and extreme heat are projected to increase in the future, while freeze-thaw cycles are projected to decrease.

Extreme rainfall can often exceed the capacity of infrastructure drainage systems and lead to flooding, water infiltration or increased erosion of infrastructure components.[25] Extreme rainfall events can impact buildings as acute hazards that occur rarely (for example the 100-year rainfall event).[26] Extreme rainfall can also cause chronic impacts, such as ongoing moisture or water infiltration. This hazard includes the impacts of pluvial flooding (i.e., overwhelmed drainage systems) but not the impacts of fluvial flooding (i.e., riverine or river flooding).

Extreme heat events are extended spells of high temperatures. As heatwaves increase in frequency and duration, temperatures will more frequently exceed the capacity of infrastructure or its components, increase the stress on building materials, and impact operations and maintenance. Extreme temperatures are both a chronic and an acute hazard. For example, thermal expansion in brick walls during a high-magnitude heat wave is an acute impact, while the accelerated deterioration of air conditioning equipment used more frequently in warmer conditions is a chronic impact.

Freeze-thaw cycles (FTCs) are fluctuations between freezing and non-freezing temperatures that cause water to freeze (and expand) or melt (and contract). The melting and re-freezing of water accelerates the weathering of building materials, and damages infrastructure components that are exposed to the atmosphere. FTC damage is caused by the combination of temperature fluctuations around zero degrees and the presence of water.[27] FTCs can be self reinforcing. When one occurs, it can leave cracks or gaps in building materials, creating the potential for further water infiltration and another cycle of freezing and expansion. “Deep” FTCs typically occur in winter and are defined as those that occur when the daily average temperature is less than 0°C.

Changes in these three climate hazards will impact Ontario’s public buildings and facilities in different ways. A typical building has many components, including its structure, envelope, equipment and finishing, mechanical and electrical systems, as well as civil infrastructure and landscaping. Figure 3‑1 describes these key building components and provides examples of the interaction between those components and the three climate hazards.

Figure 4-1 Examples of climate hazard impacts to key components of public building infrastructure

Note: For more examples of how these climate hazards impact building components, see WSP 2021.

Source: WSP.

Most climate hazards to public buildings will increase

The impacts of changing climate hazards on Ontario’s public buildings depend on the path of global greenhouse gas emissions and the extent of global mean temperature increases. The FAO costed climate impacts to public buildings for three global emissions scenarios:

  • A low emissions scenario that assumes a major and immediate turnaround in global climate policies. Emissions are projected to peak in the early 2020s and decline to zero by the 2080s. By the end of the century, net emissions are negative. In this scenario, global mean temperatures are projected to increase by 1.6°C (0.8 to 2.4°C) by 2100 compared to the pre-industrial average (1850-1900).[28] The key results for this scenario are presented in Appendix E.
  • A medium emissions scenario, where global emissions peak in the 2040s, then decline rapidly over the following four decades before stabilizing at the end of the century. In this scenario, the global mean temperature is projected to increase by 2.3°C (1.7 to 3.2°C) by 2100 relative to 1850-1900.
  • A high emissions scenario that assumes global emissions continue to grow for most of the century.[29] Global mean temperatures are projected to increase by 4.2°C (3.2 to 5.4°C) relative to 1850-1900. Cumulative emissions from 2005 to 2020 most closely match the high emissions scenario.[30]

Uncertainty in climate change projections

The FAO partnered with the Canadian Centre for Climate Services at Environment Canada to acquire projections of key climate indicators for Ontario. To account for uncertainty in climate projections and in line with common practice in climate science, the median (50th percentile) projections of climate variables are presented, followed by ranges in parentheses. For Ontario climate indicators, the ranges indicate the 10th and 90th percentile projections from the ensemble of 24 climate models used by the Canadian Centre for Climate Services.

Figure 4-2 presents a brief description of the projected changes in some of the climate indicators used to represent these hazards. Appendix B contains a full description of all relevant climate variables to public buildings, and their trends in all scenarios

Figure 4-2 Changing climate hazards in Ontario

Extreme heat to rise
  • Projected changes in Ontario’s peak July temperatures differ significantly in the low and high emissions scenarios. Compared to the 1976-2005 average, the base period for this report, Ontario’s peak July temperatures are projected to be 1.7°C (1.3 to 2.0°C) higher in the low emissions scenario by the 2030s. By the 2080s, peak July temperatures are projected to increase by 1.9°C (0.9 to 2.8°C) in the low emissions scenario and by 6.5°C (4.3 to 7.6°C) in the high emissions scenario.
  • There is high confidence in the projected trends and ranges of temperature variables based on strong scientific evidence in the causes of observed changes.
Extreme rainfall to increase
  • Average annual precipitation in Ontario is projected to increase by 6.0 per cent (5.3 to 6.6 per cent) in the low emissions scenario by the 2030s. By the 2080s, average annual precipitation is projected to rise by 7.1 per cent (4.0 to 7.8 per cent) in the low emissions scenario and by 15.0 per cent (6.2 to 18.2 per cent) in the high emissions scenario.
  • Confidence in the projected trends and ranges of aggregate precipitation variables is somewhat lower (high-to-medium) than for temperature variables as there is less confidence in how well climate models represent the climate processes involved.
Freeze-thaw cycles to decline
  • Annual FTCs are the number of days in a year when the temperature crosses 0°C. Over the coming decades, the winter season will shorten due to rising temperatures. Ontario average FTCs are projected to decline by 4.9 per cent (1.5 to 11.9 per cent) in the low emissions scenario by the 2030s. By the 2080s, annual FTCs are projected to decrease by 5.5 per cent (0 to 15.2 per cent) in the low emissions scenario and by 15.1 per cent (0 to 24.9 per cent) in the high emissions scenario.
  • There is high confidence in the projections of annual FTCs and medium confidence in deep FTCs based on the amount of evidence for projected trends and ranges.

Source: Canadian Centre for Climate Services.

Climate hazards are raising the cost of maintaining public buildings

In the absence of adaptation actions, accelerated asset deterioration will shorten the useful service life (USL) of public buildings, requiring more frequent and additional rehabilitations. Changing climate hazards will also result in higher spending on operations and maintenance (O&M). Taken together, these factors will increase the operating and capital costs necessary to maintain public buildings in a state of good repair.

In this section, the FAO presents the cost estimates of a no adaptation strategy, where asset managers do not adapt public buildings to withstand changing climate hazards. Under such a strategy, assets will require higher O&M expenses as well as additional capital spending to address accelerated deterioration. These costs are in addition to the baseline costs estimated in the previous chapter. While in practice there are many climate change adaptation initiatives under way, the intent of the no adaptation strategy is to explore the financial implications of not adapting public buildings to these climate hazards.

No adaptation strategy costs

If public buildings are not adapted to changing climate hazards, maintaining them in a state of good repair will require higher O&M expenses as well as additional capital expenses to address accelerated deterioration. These costs are defined as “damage costs.”

If a no adaptation strategy is adopted for all public buildings in Ontario, extreme heat and extreme rainfall will cause the largest financial impact, with declining freeze-thaw cycles marginally offsetting the costs.[31] The FAO estimates that in the absence of adaptation, the cumulative cost of maintaining public buildings in a state of good repair will increase by about $6 billion[32] relative to baseline spending in a stable climate over the remainder of this decade (2022-2030).

Over the long term, the extent of global climate change will influence the severity of these climate hazards and their impacts to public buildings. In the medium emissions scenario, the cumulative cost of maintaining the existing portfolio of public buildings in a state of good repair will increase by $66 billion (8.2 per cent increase over baseline), or $0.8 billion per year on average over the rest of the 21st century. However, in a high emissions scenario, cumulative costs would instead be $116 billion higher (14.5 per cent), or $1.5 billion per year on average over the rest of the century.[33]

Figure 4-3 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

These cumulative costs could vary given the range of climate projections in each global emissions scenario. In the medium emissions scenario, the FAO estimates that by 2100, additional infrastructure-related costs of maintaining Ontario’s public buildings could range from $29 billion (3.7 per cent higher than baseline) to $134 billion (16.8 per cent) by 2100. In the high emissions scenario, these additional costs could range from $55 billion (6.9 per cent) to $232 billion (29 per cent) by 2100.

5 | Adapting public buildings to climate hazards

Chapter 4 described the financial impact of not adapting public buildings to the projected changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles. In practice, buildings can be adapted to withstand these impacts – ensuring that assets perform to the same standards for which they were initially designed and do not suffer accelerated deterioration or higher O&M expenses.

This chapter discusses different forms of adaptation, defines the scope of adaptation analyzed in this report, and estimates a range of costs to adapt Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings to withstand the late-century climate projections for extreme rainfall and extreme heat[34] in the medium and high emissions scenarios.

Adapting public buildings can help prevent the impacts of climate hazards

Ontario’s public buildings have very long useful lives. Many buildings constructed in the 19th century are still in use today. Almost 70 per cent of Ontario’s public buildings have a remaining useful life of 40 years or more, and over 20 per cent have a remaining useful life of 80 years or more. Given the long useful lives of public buildings, late-century climate conditions are relevant to adaptation decisions being made now. These decisions will impact public infrastructure costs throughout the century.

However, climate projections depend on the trajectory of global emissions, which remains uncertain. This raises the difficult question of how projected changes in key climate hazards should be accounted for when public buildings are designed, built or retrofitted.[35]

Figure 5-1 Ontario’s public buildings have long remaining useful lives

Source: FAO.

Adapting public infrastructure to extreme rainfall and extreme heat could take many forms. A few examples include:

  • Updating infrastructure design parameters to a higher standard.[36]
  • Local jurisdictions in Ontario exploring adaptation options and adopting measures, including building code interpretations, general guidance for designers and operators, certification systems, and pilot projects.[37]
  • Enhancing the environment around a building to increase its ability to cope with climate hazards. This could be done at large or small scales and involve the use of green infrastructure. For example, the Port Lands Flood Protection Project is expected to provide flood resiliency to 290 hectares of Toronto’s southeastern downtown that sit in the Don River floodplain.[38] To flood protect the Port Lands, the majority of land within the floodplain will be raised by a minimum of one to three metres. The project also incorporates green infrastructure, including the creation of wetlands and marshes, through which water will be directed during very large floods.
  • Changing the way assets are managed, for example, changing the frequency of operations and maintenance schedules.[39]

Adaptation can include energy efficiency improvements to help reduce emissions. For example, the federal government is investing $182 million to increase energy efficiency and address climate change by improving how homes and buildings are designed, renovated and constructed. [40]

In the FAO’s framework, adaptation is modelled as an alteration of a building’s physical components to prevent damage costs caused by changes in extreme rainfall and heat. Figure 5-2 presents some examples of adaptation measures for each building component.[41]

Figure 5-2 Examples of building component adaptations to extreme rainfall and extreme heat

Note: For more examples of how these climate hazards impact building components, see WSP 2021.

Source: WSP.

The costs of each adaptation strategy vary based on the approach taken

To estimate adaptation costs, the FAO assumed that public buildings and facilities are adapted to withstand the late-century projections[42] for extreme rainfall and extreme heat. Once a building is adapted, the FAO assumes that no additional costs occur from accelerated deterioration or increased O&M expenses.[43] To highlight potential cost differences, the FAO developed two adaptation strategies.

  • Reactive adaptation strategy: Buildings are only adapted at the time of renewal. This approach results in a gradual increase in the share of adapted buildings over the century, with roughly 77 per cent of assets adapted by 2100. The remaining 23 per cent have service lives that extend beyond 2100 and are not renewed or adapted over the projection. These buildings incur accelerated deterioration and higher O&M costs over the duration of the outlook.
  • Proactive adaptation strategy: Buildings are adapted at the first available opportunity. This occurs either during a building’s next major rehabilitation through a retrofit[44] or at renewal, whichever comes first. In this approach, all buildings are adapted by the 2060s.

Adaptation strategy costs

Costs associated with adaptation strategy include: capital costs from increased deterioration and higher O&M expenses until adaptation, the one-time adaptation expense (either through a retrofit or renewal), and the higher O&M and capital expenses required to maintain higher-valued adapted assets.

Figure 5-3 The reactive adaptation strategy has fewer assets adapted by 2100

Source: FAO.

Adapting Ontario’s public buildings will be expensive

Under the reactive adaptation strategy, maintaining Ontario’s public buildings in a state of good repair would cost an additional $52 billion (6.5 per cent over baseline) cumulatively in the medium emissions scenario to 2100. In the high emissions scenario, the costs would instead increase by $91 billion (11.4 per cent over baseline).

Figure 5-4 The reactive adaptation strategy will see gradual rise in costs throughout the 21st century

Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

Under the proactive adaptation strategy, maintaining the portfolio would cost an additional $54 billion (6.7 per cent over baseline) cumulatively in the medium emissions scenario to 2100. In the high emissions scenario, the costs would instead increase by $104 billion (13.1 per cent over baseline).[45]

Figure 5-5 Proactively adapting all public buildings would require significant near-term investment

Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

Under a proactive adaptation strategy, the cumulative costs over the next four decades (2022-2060) are significantly higher compared to the reactive adaptation strategy. This is because all assets are adapted by the 2060s under the proactive strategy while only about one-third of assets are adapted under the reactive strategy by the same period. In addition, most adaptations are done through retrofits, which are more expensive than renewal adaptations.

By the end of the century, the cumulative costs of the proactive strategy are higher than those of the reactive strategy. This reflects the fact that all buildings are adapted under the proactive strategy (many through more expensive retrofits), while under the reactive strategy only 77 per cent of assets are adapted by 2100.[46]

These cumulative costs could vary given the range of climate projections in each global emissions scenario.[47] In the medium emissions scenario, costs across both strategies range from a low of $22 billion (2.8 per cent higher than baseline) to $108 billion (13.5 per cent higher than baseline). In the high emissions scenario, cumulative costs across both strategies range from a low of $44 billion (5.5 per cent higher than baseline) to $174 billion (21.8 per cent higher than baseline).

6 | Comparing the costs of different asset management strategies

Chapters 4 and 5 examined the costs of maintaining assets in a state of good repair in the presence of climate change under three asset management strategies: no adaptation, reactive adaptation and proactive adaptation. None of the strategies presented in this report are meant to be a precise representation of future costs, and the portfolio level costing results are not intended to inform asset-specific management decisions. These strategies were designed to estimate the scale of the budgetary impact that changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles could impose on the province and municipalities over the rest of the century.

This chapter compares cost estimates across the three asset management strategies and discusses the difference in cost profiles between them. The chapter then discusses the factors that were beyond the scope of the FAO’s analysis but are relevant in determining the most cost-effective strategy for managing Ontario's public buildings in a changing climate.

Adapting public buildings could modestly lower the direct infrastructure costs for the province and municipalities

Changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will increase the cost of maintaining Ontario’s public buildings in a state of good repair regardless of whether buildings are adapted. However, the timing of when additional costs are incurred as well as the proportion of buildings adapted vary between the different adaptation strategies.

Figure 6‑1 shows how the cumulative cost grows under the three strategies in different emissions scenarios. Under the no adaptation strategy, additional costs accumulate consistently over the projection as extreme rainfall and extreme heat become more frequent and intense. The costs have a similar profile under the reactive adaptation strategy, with savings only starting to take effect after the 2070s.

In contrast, the proactive adaptation strategy sees substantial adaptation costs over the next four decades as all public buildings are adapted primarily through retrofits. This strategy sees much higher up-front costs compared to the no adaptation and reactive strategies. Under this strategy, all public buildings are adapted by the 2060s, leading to a much slower growth in costs in the late century.

Figure 6-1 Asset management strategies to cope with extreme rainfall and heat have different cost profiles

Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: FAO.

In both the medium and high emissions scenarios, the FAO estimates that on an undiscounted basis, the cumulative costs by the end of the 21st century are the highest under the no adaptation strategy, followed by the proactive adaptation and reactive adaptation strategies.[48]

Although the differences between the cumulative costs under the three strategies are small relative to the increase in overall costs, the proportion of assets that remain vulnerable to changing climate hazards differs substantially. Under the proactive strategy, 100 per cent of assets are adapted by 2060. Under the reactive strategy, only 32 per cent of assets are adapted by 2060, rising to 77 per cent by the end of the century. Under the no adaptation strategy, all assets remain vulnerable to these changing climate hazards.

Table 6-1 presents a summary of the costs, timing and risk exposure of public buildings under the three different adaptation strategies.

Table 6-1 Summary of outcomes under different asset management strategies Source: FAO.
No Adaptation Strategy Reactive Adaptation Strategy Proactive Adaptation Strategy
When are buildings adapted? No buildings are adapted Buildings are adapted during renewal Buildings are adapted at earliest opportunity
What are the additional costs incurred? Costs from more rapid deterioration and higher O&M expenses Costs from more rapid deterioration and higher O&M expenses prior to adaptation, costs to adapt assets at renewal, and costs to maintain higher value adapted assets in a state of good repair Cost from more rapid deterioration and higher O&M expenses prior to adaptation, costs to adapt assets (including one-time retrofits or additional costs at renewal), and costs to maintain higher value adapted assets in a state of good repair
What is the timing of these additional costs? Costs accumulate steadily over the century Costs accumulate steadily but stabilize near the end of the century as majority of buildings are adapted and avoid costs from accelerated deterioration and higher O&M expenses Costs increase rapidly to 2060 as all buildings are adapted, then accumulate more slowly as adapted assets avoid costs from accelerated deterioration and higher O&M expenses
What is the proportion of adapted buildings by 2100? No assets are adapted Roughly 77 per cent of assets are adapted All assets are adapted

Other factors should be considered to assess the cost effectiveness of adaptation strategies

Costing of the three different asset management strategies at the portfolio level was designed to estimate the scale of the budgetary impact that changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles could impose on the province and municipalities over the rest of the century. However, to make asset-specific climate adaptation decisions, many other factors should be considered.

Determining the most cost-effective asset management strategy for a specific building would need to account for the asset’s individual characteristics (including age, condition and specific climate vulnerabilities) while balancing other priorities given the government’s budget constraints. A cost-effectiveness analysis would also need to consider a wider array of climate impacts over the entire useful life of an asset than the scope of the FAO’s analysis included.[49]

The following costs and benefits were not included within the FAO’s scope but are likely to have substantial financial impacts.

  • More frequent rehabilitations or inspections could potentially disrupt regular service delivery, as would unplanned service disruptions. Such disruptions can impact productivity, community life, health and safety, especially for essential services such as hospitals, schools or water treatment facilities. In extreme cases, severe climate events could leave an asset entirely unusable, significantly impacting the asset owners and users.
  • Damage to one part of a building could impact surrounding infrastructure and result in higher financial costs to other asset owners. The FAO’s approach treats the impact of each climate hazard independently and does not account for the significant inter-dependencies between infrastructure components. For example, heavy rainfall may damage a building’s envelope, but the building’s inability to manage the rainfall could also damage surrounding infrastructure.
  • Since buildings have long useful lives, adaptation can reduce costs of climate hazards well beyond the 2100 projection horizon. These benefits accruing to the adaptation strategies are not included.

Incorporating these aspects into the analysis would show substantially larger benefits of adaptation.[50]

7 | Appendix

Appendix A : Scope of buildings and facilities analysed

Table 7-1 Provincial and municipal building infrastructure valued at $254 billion (current replacement value) was included in the scope of this report Note: The age data presented are as of 2020. Source: FAO analysis of municipal data and provincial data as detailed in Financial Accountability Office of Ontario, 2020 and 2021a.
Level of Government Sector Total CRV (2020$ billions) Description
Provincial Transit $5
  • Ontario’s transit assets are owned by Metrolinx, which operates primarily in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area, and Ontario Northland Transportation Commission (ONTC), which operates primarily in northeastern Ontario.
  • Metrolinx owns the GO Transit network, which includes about 70 stations as well as the UP Express network.
Hospitals $45
  • Hospital assets are owned by 141 hospital corporations in Ontario and controlled by the Province through the Ministry of Health (MOH).
  • In total, there are 913 building assets totalling over 90 million square feet. On average, each building is approximately 47 years old.
  • There are also 243 site component assets totalling over 9,000 square feet, with an average age of approximately 49 years.
Schools $67
  • Ontario’s primary and secondary schools are owned by 72 local school boards and four school-board authorities and controlled by the Province through the Ministry of Education (EDU).
  • In total, there are approximately 5,000 school buildings totalling about 290 million square feet, with an average age of approximately 41 years.[51]
  • There are also approximately 161 buildings used for administration purposes, totalling about 4.4 million square feet, with an average age of 43 years.
Colleges $11
  • Colleges sector assets are owned by Ontario’s 24 colleges and controlled by the Province through the Ministry of Colleges and Universities (MCU).
  • In aggregate, college buildings total over 30 million square feet. On average, each campus includes about 1.3 million square feet and is 33 years old.
Other $13
  • Includes buildings such as government owned offices, special purpose buildings, correctional facilities, courthouses, etc.
  • Other Provincial infrastructure assets are managed by various ministries but are consolidated mostly by the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services (MGCS) and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF).
  • MGCS consolidates realty assets under the General Real Estate Portfolio (GREP), which provides real estate and project management services to other Provincial entities.
  • GREP consolidates over 150 office buildings totalling about 10 million square feet, with an average size of about 65,000 square feet and age of 47 years.
  • GREP also consolidates special purpose buildings, which include justice sector assets, such as correctional facilities and courthouses, and smaller assets, such as storage facilities.
Municipal Transit-related $2
  • Building assets owned by individual municipalities, such as passenger stations/terminals and transit shelters as well as maintenance and storage facilities.
Water-related $37
  • $13 billion in building-type potable water infrastructure such as water pump stations and water treatment facilities.
  • $23 billion in building-type wastewater infrastructure such as wastewater lift stations, pump stations and treatment plants.
  • $1 billion in building-type storm water infrastructure such as storm water drainage pump stations.
Other buildings and facilities $75
  • $23 billion in social housing, $19 billion in government administration buildings, $19 billion in tourism, culture and sport facilities, and approximately $13 billion in justice, health, social services, waste management, and other buildings and facilities.

Appendix B : Scope of climate variables used in costing analysis

The Canadian Centre for Climate Services provided the projections of all climate indicators used in the FAO’s costing analysis. Depending on the nature of the hazard’s interaction with specific building components, different climate indicators were used. See WSP’s report for a full description and rationale.[52]

Table 7-2 Projected change in relevant climate variables from 1976-2005 to 2071-2100, Ontario average Note: Numbers are rounded. Median (50th percentile) projections of climate variables are presented, followed by ranges in parentheses. Ranges show the 10th and 90th percentile projections. Source: Canadian Centre for Climate Services.
Climate Hazard Variable Definition Low Emissions
(RCP2.6)
Medium Emissions
(RCP4.5)
High Emissions
(RCP8.5)
Extreme Heat Mean July maximum daily temperature Monthly mean of daily maximum temperature in July +1.8°C
(+0.9 to 2.5°C)
+3.6°C
(+1.9 to 3.8°C)
+6.5°C
(+4.0 to 7.9°C)
2.5% July daily maximum temperature 97.5th percentile of the distribution of daily maximum temperature in July +1.9°C
(+0.9 to 2.8°C)
+3.4°C
(+2.4 to 4.3°C)
+6.5°C
(+4.3 to 7.6°C)
Annual number of cooling degree-days Annual sum of daily degrees above 18°C +71°C-days
(+37 to 117°C-days)
+161°C-days
(+86 to 212°C-days)
+381°C-days
(+225 to 515°C-days)
Extreme Rainfall Annual total precipitation Annual total amount of precipitation received +7.1 per cent
(+4.0 to 7.8 per cent)
+9.8 per cent
(+4.4 to 10.3 per cent)
+15.0 per cent
(+6.2 to 18.2 per cent)
IDF 15-min 1:10 Short duration rainfall intensity for a 15-minute 1-in-10-year event +14.6 per cent
(+9.8 to 23.5 per cent)
+24.9 per cent
(+16.1 to 39.4 per cent)
+53.0 per cent
(+38.0 to 78.2 per cent)
IDF 24-hour 1:5 Short duration rainfall intensity for a 24-hour 1-in-5-year event +14.6 per cent
(+9.8 to 23.5 per cent)
+24.9 per cent
(+16.1 to 39.4 per cent)
+53.0 per cent
(+38.0 to 78.2 per cent)
IDF 24-hour 1:100 Short duration rainfall intensity for a 24-hour 1-in-100-year event +14.6 per cent
(+9.8 to 23.5 per cent)
+24.9 per cent
(+16.1 to 39.4 per cent)
+53.0 per cent
(+38.0 to 78.2 per cent)
IDF 24-hour 1:10 Short duration rainfall intensity for a 24-hour 1-in-10-year event +14.6 per cent
(+9.8 to 23.5 per cent)
+24.9 per cent
(+16.1 to 39.4 per cent)
+53.0 per cent
(+38.0 to 78.2 per cent)
Freeze-Thaw Cycles Annual freeze-thaw cycles Annual number of days with daily maximum temperature above 0°C and daily minimum temperature below 0°C -5.5 per cent
(-15.2 to 0.0 per cent)
-12.1 per cent
(-19.2 to 0.0 per cent)
-15.1 per cent
(-24.9 to 0.0 per cent)
Deep freeze-thaw cycles Annual number of days with daily maximum temperature above 0°C, daily minimum temperature below 0°C, and daily average temperature equal or less than 0°C -2.3 per cent
(-8.3 to +4.6 per cent)
-4.4 per cent
(-10.8 to +4.8 per cent)
-4.9 per cent
(-15.8 to +12.5 per cent)

Appendix C : The impact of climate hazards on public buildings

In the absence of adaptation measures, changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will impact the useful service life (USL) of public buildings. They will also impact the operations and maintenance (O&M) spending that would be required to maintain Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings in a state of good repair. However, adapting public buildings to withstand changes in these climate hazards will require investment.

To establish relationships between relevant climate indicators and key infrastructure costs, the FAO worked with WSP, a large engineering firm with expertise in all aspects of public sector infrastructure, including asset management, public infrastructure construction and operations, and climate change impacts. WSP estimated relationships between climate variables and infrastructure costs by surveying relevant engineering experts. To account for engineering uncertainty, WSP aggregated their responses and provided optimistic, pessimistic and most-likely cost relationships. This forms the basis on which the FAO estimated the additional costs of climate hazards to public buildings in Ontario.[53]

Based on these engineering relationships, this appendix describes how the three climate hazards are expected to impact the USL and O&M costs of Ontario’s public buildings over the rest of the 21st century. It also provides average adaptation cost estimates to adapt public buildings to the projected change in these climate hazards for each decade of the century.

While regional climate projections were used to develop the FAO’s cost estimates, the results presented in this appendix combine Ontario average climate projections with WSP’s cost relationships to illustrate the impacts. The engineering impacts by economic regions are available on the FAO website.

Climate hazards are reducing the useful service life of public buildings in the absence of adaptation

The FAO estimates that increases in extreme rainfall and heat are reducing the USL of public buildings in Ontario, resulting in faster deterioration than would otherwise have occurred in a stable climate. Over the long term, increases in extreme rainfall and heat will further reduce the USL of buildings in both emissions scenarios, although the impact is more significant in the high emissions scenario. While impacts to individual buildings may vary, these results should be interpreted as the average impact across the portfolio of public buildings in the project’s scope.

Figure 7-1 The useful service life of public buildings will decline due to projected changes in extreme heat, extreme rainfall and freeze-thaw cycles in the absence of adaptation actions

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Trends in extreme rainfall primarily drive the reduction in USL for Ontario’s portfolio of public, followed by extreme heat. While declining trends in freeze-thaw cycles are estimated to prolong USLs, this is more than offset by the impact of the other hazards.

Figure 7-2 More extreme rainfall is the biggest factor accelerating the deterioration of public buildings

Note: These values are based on the median (50th percentile) Ontario average climate projections using the estimates of “most likely” engineering outcome. The range of climate and engineering uncertainties has been omitted in this figure for presentation purposes.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Climate hazards will increase O&M expenses for public buildings in the absence of adaptation

The FAO estimates that increases in extreme rainfall and heat are raising the O&M expenses of public buildings faster than would otherwise have occurred in a stable climate. Over the rest of the century, the required O&M expense to maintain public buildings in a state of good repair is projected to rise in both emissions scenarios, with a larger increase in the high emissions scenario.

Figure 7-3 Projected changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will raise the O&M expenses of Ontario’s public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Trends in extreme rainfall are expected to drive most of the projected increases in O&M expenses to public buildings, while extreme heat has a much smaller impact. Fewer freeze-thaw cycles in the future will modestly reduce O&M expenses to public buildings on average, although the impacts of other hazards more than offset this small reduction.

Figure 7-4 More intense rainfall will contribute the most to rising O&M costs for public buildings

Note: These values are based on the median (50th percentile) Ontario average climate projections using the estimates of “most likely” engineering outcome. The range of climate and engineering uncertainties has been omitted in this figure for presentation purposes.

Source: WSP and FAO.

The cost of adapting public buildings to withstand these climate hazards increases with the extent of climate change

In the FAO’s framework, adaptation is modelled as an alteration of a building’s physical components to prevent more rapid deterioration and increased O&M expenses caused by changes in extreme rainfall and heat. Adaptation costs are considered one-time investments, occurring either as a retrofit during a building’s service life, or as part of a full redesign and rebuild at the end of its service life.

The costs of adaptation are also assumed to vary depending on the severity of the climate hazards the adaptation is designed to withstand. The more severe the climate hazard, the higher the expected adaptation costs. Based on WSP estimates, the cost of adapting a building during its service life through a retrofit is expected to be more expensive than the increased cost of designing and constructing a new climate-adapted building at the end of its service life.

While the FAO’s analysis only uses the cost estimates in the 2080s to estimate portfolio-wide adaptation costs, the full range of costs per decade is shown below to illustrate how these costs vary with changing climate hazards. Adaptation costs are expressed as a percentage of a building’s current replacement value. For example, if a building is valued at $1.0 million, and the adaptation is assumed to cost 5 per cent, the adaptation cost is $50,000. All costs are in 2020 real dollars.

Figure 7-5 The cost of retrofitting Ontario’s public buildings to withstand extreme rainfall and heat will depend on the extent of climate change

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Figure 7-6 The cost of adapting Ontario’s public buildings at renewal to withstand extreme rainfall and heat will depend on the extent of climate change

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Appendix D : Comparing the present value costs of different asset management strategies

When evaluating financial decisions, the timing of cash flows is important.[54] A standard approach to deal with the timing implications of spending is to discount costs into present value dollars using a discount rate. When discounted, costs incurred further in the future carry less weight relative to costs incurred sooner.

Chapter 6 showed that in undiscounted real dollars, the reactive adaptation strategy had a marginally lower cumulative additional cost over the projection, followed by the proactive adaptation strategy, while the no adaptation strategy had the highest costs. Figure 7-7 shows how the choice of discount rate impacts the present value of the total cost estimates for the median climate projections.

Figure 7-7 The present value cost of each asset management strategy under different discount rates

Note: The costs presented use the median (50th percentile) climate projections and “most likely” engineering costs.

Source: FAO.

At discount rates above 1 or 1.5 per cent (depending on the emissions scenario), the proactive adaptation strategy is more expensive in present value terms compared to other strategies. At discount rates below 4.5 to 5.5 per cent, the reactive adaptation strategy remains the lower cost strategy in present value terms. However, above 4.5 to 5.5 per cent, the present value of the reactive adaptation and no adaptation strategies becomes similar. This happens as the cost profiles under both strategies are comparable until 2070s (see Figure 6‑1), and the savings from the reactive adaptation strategy after 2070s are more heavily discounted at higher rates.

The choice of a discount rate will affect the relative costs of each strategy. Rate selection will have intergenerational equity implications, as higher discount rates favour current generations over future ones. These strategies were not designed to inform asset-specific management decisions, but rather to estimate the scale of their budgetary impacts. The costs compared above do not incorporate the full spectrum of societal impacts these climate hazards will impose (as noted in Chapter 6), nor do they reflect the climate and engineering uncertainties discussed throughout the report.

Appendix E : Costing results in the low emissions scenario

While the report focused on the medium and high emissions scenario, Appendix E presents the costing results of the three adaptation strategies for all emissions scenarios.

In the low emissions scenario, a major and immediate turnaround in global climate policies is assumed. Emissions are projected to peak in the early 2020s and decline to zero by the 2080s, limiting the rise in global mean temperatures to 1.6°C (0.8 to 2.4°C) by 2100 compared to the pre-industrial average.[55] Even in the low emissions scenario, change in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will still have material financial impacts. Taken together they would raise the costs of maintaining Ontario’s public buildings by $43 billion (5.4 per cent above baseline) to 2100 in the absence of adaptation.

Figure 7-8 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings by $43 billion in the low emissions scenario in the absence of adaptation

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Figure 7-9 A reactive adaptation strategy, where buildings are adapted when renewed at the end of their service life to withstand the impacts of more extreme rainfall and heat, will add $35 billion in infrastructure costs over the century in the low emissions scenario

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: WSP and FAO.

Figure 7-10 A proactive adaptation strategy, where buildings are adapted at the earliest opportunity to withstand the impacts of more extreme rainfall and heat, will add $33 billion in infrastructure costs over the century in the low emissions scenario

Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period.

Source: WSP and FAO.

8 | References


About this document

Established by the Financial Accountability Officer Act, 2013, the Financial Accountability Office (FAO) provides independent analysis on the state of the Province’s finances, trends in the provincial economy and related matters important to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

This report was prepared by Sabrina Afroz, Nicolas Rhodes, Jay Park and Mavis Yang under the direction of Edward Crummey. This report benefitted from contributions from Katrina Talavera, Laura Irish, Paul Lewis and David West. External reviewers were provided with earlier drafts of this report for their comments. However, the input of external reviewers implies no responsibility for this final report, which rests solely with the FAO.

In keeping with the FAO’s mandate to provide the Legislative Assembly of Ontario with independent economic and financial analysis, this report makes no policy recommendations.


Glossary of Terms

List of Abbreviations

Term Definition
AR5 Fifth Assessment Report
AR6 Sixth Assessment Report
CIPI Costing Climate Change Impact on Public Infrastructure (project)
CRV Current Replacement Value
IDF Intensity-Duration-Frequency (Curve)
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
O&M Operation and Maintenance
RCP Representative Concentration Pathway
SME Subject-Matter Experts
USL Useful Service Life
WSP WSP Global Inc.

Definitions

Current Replacement Value: The current cost of rebuilding an asset with the equivalent capacity, functionality and performance.

Operations and Maintenance (O&M): The routine activities performed on an asset that maximize service life and minimize service disruptions.

Rehabilitation: Repairing part or most of an asset to extend its service life, without adding to its capacity, functionality or performance.

Renewal: Replacement of an existing asset, resulting in a new or as-new asset with an equivalent capacity, functionality and performance as the original asset. Renewal is different from rehabilitation, as renewal rebuilds the entire asset.

State of Good Repair: A performance standard which helps to maximize the benefits of public infrastructure in a cost-effective manner and ensures the assets operate in a condition that is considered acceptable from both an engineering and cost management perspective.

Stable Climate / Baseline Cost Projection: The operations and maintenance, rehabilitation, and renewal expense that would have been required to maintain public buildings in a state of good repair if climate indicators for extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles remain unchanged from their 1975-2005 average levels over the projection to 2100.

Rest of the Century: Refers to the 79 years from 2022 to 2100.

Acute Hazard: Severe climate hazards that occur rarely (such as the 100-year storm event).

Chronic Hazard: Climate hazards that are changing gradually.

Retrofit: A retrofit is an adaptation made during the building’s service life.

Adaptation: Adaptation is modelled as an alteration of a building’s physical components to prevent more rapid deterioration and increased O&M expenses caused by changes in extreme rainfall and heat. Adaptation can be done through retrofit while an asset is still in service or can be done at the time of renewal.

No Adaptation Atrategy / Damage Costs: An asset management strategy where public buildings are not adapted to changing climate hazards. Under this strategy, additional costs are incurred from increased deterioration and higher O&M expenses caused by climate change hazards.

Reactive Adaptation Strategy: An asset management strategy where public buildings are only adapted at the time of renewal to withstand changing climate condition.

Proactive Adaptation Strategy: An asset management strategy where public buildings are adapted at the first available opportunity to withstand changing climate condition. This occurs either during a building’s next major rehabilitation through a retrofit or at renewal, whichever comes first.


Graphical Descriptions

Figure 1-1 CIPI project structure and timeline Source: FAO. Return to image
Release Date Report Title
Previously Released Provincial Infrastructure
Municipal Infrastructure
Fall 2021 CIPI Project Backgrounder and Methodology
WSP Report
Buildings and Facilities
2022 Public Transportation Infrastructure
Public Water Infrastructure
Summary Report
Figure 2-1 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Medium Low $0 $2 $5 $9 $13 $18 $24 $27 $29
Median $0 $5 $12 $22 $34 $43 $54 $64 $66
High $1 $10 $19 $49 $65 $88 $103 $126 $134
High Low $0 $2 $6 $12 $20 $28 $40 $49 $55
Median $0 $6 $14 $26 $42 $60 $77 $104 $116
High $1 $10 $20 $54 $77 $106 $143 $188 $232
Figure 2-2 The long-term cumulative costs of maintaining Ontario’s public buildings are modestly lower when adaptation actions are taken Notes: he costs presented in this chart are in addition to the baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
No Adaptation $66 $116
Reactive Adaptation $52 $91
Proactive Adaptation $54 $104
Figure 3-1 Ontario’s portfolio of public buildings has a Current Replacement Value of $254 billion Note: CRV estimates are in real 2020 billion dollars. Percentage values refer to a sector’s share of total CRV. Source: FAO. Return to image
Level of Government Sector CRV Share
Municipal Other buildings and facilities $75 29%
Potable water, Storm water and Wastewater Facilities $37 14%
Transit $2 1%
Provincial Schools $67 26%
Hospitals $45 18%
Other provincial buildings $13 5%
Colleges $11 4%
Transit $5 2%
Figure 3-2 Proportion of public buildings requiring rehabilitation or renewal each year Source: FAO. Return to image
Year Proportion of Public Building Infrastructure by CRV Requiring Rehabilitation and Renewal Spending (Per Cent) Average
2022 8 6
2023 1
2024 2
2025 4
2026 7
2027 2
2028 5
2029 3
2030 4
2031 3
2032 4
2033 3
2034 7
2035 4
2036 5
2037 7
2038 8
2039 9
2040 10
2041 5
2042 6
2043 5
2044 4
2045 4
2046 5
2047 11
2048 7
2049 4
2050 6
2051 8
2052 8
2053 11
2054 8
2055 5
2056 3
2057 6
2058 5
2059 3
2060 6
2061 9
2062 7
2063 6
2064 6
2065 3
2066 6
2067 9
2068 10
2069 4
2070 4
2071 8
2072 5
2073 7
2074 5
2075 8
2076 4
2077 4
2078 4
2079 4
2080 8
2081 10
2082 5
2083 3
2084 5
2085 4
2086 7
2087 4
2088 4
2089 13
2090 5
2091 4
2092 6
2093 5
2094 4
2095 7
2096 5
2097 6
2098 9
2099 10
2100 3

Figure 3-3 The cumulative cost of maintaining Ontario's public buildings and facilities in a state of good repair to 2100 in a stable climate

In a stable climate, the cumulative cost of bringing and maintaining Ontario’s existing suite of public buildings into a state of good repair until 2100 would be $799 billion, or an average of roughly $10 billion per year. This baseline cost includes $296 billion in cumulative O&M expense and $503 billion in rehabilitation and renewal expense to 2100.

Note: All values presented in real 2020 dollars.

Source: FAO.

Figure 4-1 Examples of climate hazard impacts to key components of public building infrastructure Note: For more examples of how these climate hazards impact building components, see WSP 2021. Source: WSP. Return to image
Building Component Includes Relevant climate hazards
Structure Superstructure, foundation, and roof structure. Humidity and freeze-thaw cycles impact the structure if cracks in the material are present. Greatest impact is likely to be experienced in exposed components where water accumulation is most likely.
Mechanical and Electrical Boilers, air terminal AV box, ductwork, roof top air conditioner, panel board, motors, conduits, and wiring. Extreme heat impacts mechanical and electrical systems, depending on the thermal isolation of the envelope and on the capacity of mechanical systems to maintain ambient air in specific conditions (temperature and humidity).
Equipment and Finishing Painting, high-performance coatings, and staining, parking control, loading docks, and waste-handling. Extreme rainfall and freeze-thaw cycles impact equipment and finishing, depending on the performance of the envelope. Exposure of interior finishes to leakage may result in mold development and impact the durability of the assets.
Envelope Claddings, doors, glazing, and roof. Extreme high temperature fosters thermal expansion of materials and decreasing building performance. Freeze-thaw cycles cause envelope deterioration and cracking. Extreme rainfall results in erosion of porous materials, corrosion, and damage from leakage.
Civil and Landscaping Asphalt, concrete walkways and surfacing. Extreme rainfall undermines the performance of water management systems—the primary civil infrastructure component of buildings. Extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles impact the asphalt and concrete elements.
Figure 4-2 Changing climate hazards in Ontario (Extreme Rainfall) Source: Canadian Centre for Climate Services. Return to image
Low Emissions Scenario Medium-Emissions Scenario High-Emissions Scenario
Year Low Median High Low Median High Low Median High
1950 619 676 787 619 676 787 619 676 788
1951 618 684 734 618 684 734 618 684 734
1952 618 684 771 617 684 770 616 684 771
1953 639 663 727 639 663 727 639 663 727
1954 618 657 722 619 657 722 619 657 722
1955 610 672 730 611 672 730 611 672 730
1956 632 670 750 632 670 750 632 669 750
1957 606 659 730 609 659 730 607 659 730
1958 654 686 750 654 685 749 654 686 750
1959 635 709 782 635 709 782 635 710 782
1960 617 659 747 617 659 747 617 660 747
1961 588 676 740 588 676 740 588 676 740
1962 646 688 773 646 688 775 646 688 773
1963 607 684 749 607 684 748 607 684 748
1964 594 667 760 595 669 760 596 671 760
1965 610 657 745 610 656 745 610 657 745
1966 605 676 774 601 676 774 604 676 774
1967 630 670 726 630 672 726 630 672 725
1968 615 675 722 616 674 723 615 674 725
1969 608 697 770 608 697 770 608 697 770
1970 599 653 736 599 654 736 601 653 736
1971 616 692 750 616 692 750 616 692 750
1972 618 674 744 617 673 744 616 673 744
1973 592 692 764 592 692 763 592 692 764
1974 618 674 748 617 673 747 617 673 748
1975 623 670 744 624 670 743 623 670 742
1976 596 661 730 596 661 730 596 661 730
1977 607 694 771 607 694 771 607 694 771
1978 617 673 722 617 673 722 617 674 722
1979 625 674 761 622 674 761 622 674 761
1980 600 667 743 602 667 741 601 666 741
1981 633 679 758 632 679 758 632 679 758
1982 643 671 723 643 672 722 644 672 723
1983 576 658 724 577 658 723 577 659 722
1984 587 635 711 587 635 711 586 634 713
1985 623 656 730 624 656 731 624 656 730
1986 635 679 753 635 678 753 635 677 753
1987 628 689 779 629 690 780 629 689 778
1988 622 676 772 620 676 774 621 676 773
1989 592 698 769 594 697 769 593 696 769
1990 668 707 802 668 708 802 667 708 803
1991 642 659 757 641 659 759 642 658 758
1992 591 648 719 591 648 719 590 647 720
1993 602 663 720 602 661 721 601 662 722
1994 619 677 725 619 680 724 619 680 724
1995 632 680 748 633 681 748 632 682 748
1996 628 665 757 627 665 758 625 666 757
1997 624 693 757 624 694 757 624 694 758
1998 642 718 749 643 717 751 641 718 749
1999 650 709 776 651 709 776 650 708 776
2000 620 691 783 619 690 787 620 688 785
2001 661 697 786 662 697 786 660 698 785
2002 645 708 769 647 708 770 646 708 769
2003 639 715 761 640 715 761 640 715 762
2004 599 658 756 600 659 753 599 659 753
2005 601 719 804 597 719 804 597 719 805
2006 614 684 758 618 680 736 641 706 776
2007 616 685 748 652 717 776 653 719 805
2008 636 721 778 647 681 752 635 700 742
2009 630 738 805 597 690 809 644 698 775
2010 660 716 757 648 721 756 634 719 780
2011 640 711 769 613 697 769 638 701 804
2012 621 685 751 633 711 788 629 684 761
2013 617 715 769 657 719 803 645 710 767
2014 637 745 800 636 708 774 637 701 780
2015 639 719 783 631 704 801 623 687 781
2016 649 694 726 660 732 781 622 707 791
2017 617 708 752 626 691 761 644 707 793
2018 636 698 767 635 729 766 641 713 753
2019 647 711 775 633 703 781 638 699 776
2020 652 716 797 669 745 783 641 699 793
2021 604 692 763 627 713 748 632 695 803
2022 647 702 754 642 714 823 611 697 772
2023 659 722 792 668 729 785 617 706 771
2024 616 723 794 652 695 795 632 708 791
2025 660 697 776 650 713 800 631 697 765
2026 612 713 808 630 695 803 651 718 754
2027 632 723 786 660 721 770 648 741 786
2028 644 715 775 615 732 793 649 734 798
2029 618 720 808 633 734 804 666 725 824
2030 653 708 772 630 700 773 646 708 802
2031 638 736 810 676 724 789 639 754 823
2032 657 738 787 658 740 792 677 732 794
2033 670 720 771 619 721 791 622 720 776
2034 629 715 780 634 736 785 634 708 761
2035 685 723 776 652 702 799 685 745 789
2036 674 740 802 683 740 806 668 736 797
2037 679 748 813 633 718 839 658 733 785
2038 644 737 812 628 729 835 618 715 812
2039 662 704 803 659 747 829 678 745 795
2040 684 719 793 657 720 800 657 745 837
2041 647 725 804 662 716 782 683 730 808
2042 645 738 809 658 719 761 678 744 812
2043 659 735 806 625 723 809 653 739 808
2044 669 740 815 645 731 802 677 750 820
2045 641 741 833 657 715 784 657 740 808
2046 660 728 796 674 764 821 686 757 854
2047 647 730 818 642 725 802 653 749 824
2048 668 706 798 684 726 774 591 757 802
2049 653 745 818 664 747 808 667 722 815
2050 656 736 813 662 747 821 659 759 814
2051 656 714 807 673 749 814 684 757 814
2052 658 718 812 668 735 862 641 758 823
2053 675 727 812 675 740 842 640 730 793
2054 694 744 783 685 759 898 718 773 834
2055 647 722 797 676 769 845 674 751 823
2056 626 713 803 706 757 822 665 773 866
2057 649 715 839 646 726 826 657 721 824
2058 617 745 830 597 725 843 678 750 845
2059 670 708 831 644 713 813 687 765 821
2060 605 708 789 634 746 803 681 746 806
2061 624 724 779 679 764 821 688 757 842
2062 610 724 785 633 734 835 667 738 837
2063 698 755 820 667 738 815 680 756 822
2064 628 740 803 693 744 835 669 748 854
2065 661 746 810 680 745 810 681 763 829
2066 696 744 806 686 756 827 686 762 820
2067 646 751 817 668 732 835 674 742 828
2068 659 712 769 651 760 794 700 785 864
2069 655 732 832 670 753 814 667 758 874
2070 628 757 803 656 715 819 662 796 871
2071 622 759 826 688 732 828 709 767 868
2072 682 747 840 672 726 840 648 742 903
2073 644 715 787 654 731 830 663 774 856
2074 650 748 843 677 754 824 693 751 847
2075 643 718 793 671 735 851 695 740 828
2076 610 716 800 623 705 836 676 755 860
2077 687 750 813 670 738 815 673 798 849
2078 668 756 826 613 756 807 668 750 818
2079 659 728 786 665 747 819 704 788 896
2080 619 729 797 639 749 840 683 769 813
2081 643 734 806 673 742 815 677 818 894
2082 613 731 808 659 752 843 660 792 846
2083 687 725 785 676 748 835 689 774 860
2084 606 711 796 680 743 821 679 787 867
2085 674 714 802 686 749 863 663 798 870
2086 626 736 787 666 745 828 648 786 863
2087 639 726 806 669 748 882 733 817 893
2088 648 735 832 661 744 815 709 805 882
2089 640 730 775 645 751 829 698 765 858
2090 650 749 803 660 738 814 721 810 872
2091 649 740 798 684 744 835 688 753 858
2092 674 735 835 669 748 829 693 792 921
2093 651 730 787 683 747 802 662 760 917
2094 656 733 847 695 766 808 714 804 923
2095 657 741 825 664 736 805 712 815 905
2096 660 715 793 657 735 801 701 812 907
2097 643 705 785 695 760 840 725 807 889
2098 662 713 789 693 754 865 681 826 881
2099 635 740 807 696 746 839 680 812 893
2100 659 736 847 671 771 829 638 806 896
Figure 4-2 Changing climate hazards in Ontario (Extreme Heat) Source: Canadian Centre for Climate Services. Return to image
Low Emissions Scenario Medium-Emissions Scenario High-Emissions Scenario
Year Low Median High Low Median High Low Median High
1950 26 29 31 26 29 31 26 29 31
1951 27 30 33 27 30 33 27 30 33
1952 28 30 31 28 30 31 28 30 31
1953 26 30 32 26 30 32 26 30 32
1954 27 30 31 27 30 31 27 30 31
1955 28 29 32 28 29 32 28 29 32
1956 29 30 33 29 30 33 29 30 33
1957 27 29 34 27 29 34 27 29 34
1958 26 29 31 26 29 31 26 29 31
1959 27 29 33 27 29 33 27 29 33
1960 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1961 27 31 32 27 31 32 27 31 32
1962 26 29 31 26 29 31 26 29 31
1963 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1964 27 29 31 27 29 31 27 29 31
1965 27 29 31 27 29 31 27 29 31
1966 27 28 31 27 28 31 27 28 31
1967 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1968 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1969 26 29 31 26 29 31 26 29 31
1970 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1971 27 29 31 27 29 31 27 29 31
1972 27 30 31 27 30 31 27 30 31
1973 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1974 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1975 27 30 31 27 30 31 27 30 31
1976 27 30 32 27 30 32 27 30 32
1977 27 30 31 27 30 31 27 30 31
1978 28 29 31 28 29 31 28 29 31
1979 27 29 32 27 29 32 27 29 32
1980 28 30 32 28 30 32 28 30 32
1981 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1982 28 29 32 28 29 33 28 29 33
1983 28 30 31 28 30 31 28 30 31
1984 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1985 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1986 27 30 31 27 30 32 27 30 32
1987 26 29 32 26 29 32 26 29 32
1988 27 29 33 27 29 33 27 29 33
1989 28 31 33 28 31 33 28 31 33
1990 29 30 32 29 30 32 29 30 32
1991 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
1992 27 30 31 27 30 31 27 30 31
1993 27 29 31 27 29 31 27 29 31
1994 27 30 32 27 30 32 27 30 32
1995 28 29 32 28 29 32 28 29 32
1996 28 31 33 28 31 32 28 31 33
1997 28 30 32 28 30 32 28 30 32
1998 28 30 32 28 30 32 28 30 32
1999 29 30 32 29 30 32 29 30 32
2000 28 30 32 28 30 32 28 30 32
2001 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
2002 29 31 33 29 31 33 29 31 33
2003 28 30 32 28 30 32 28 30 32
2004 28 30 33 28 30 33 28 30 33
2005 28 31 33 28 31 33 28 31 33
2006 28 30 34 28 30 32 30 31 34
2007 28 31 33 30 31 33 28 30 32
2008 29 31 34 29 31 34 28 30 34
2009 28 32 32 28 30 33 27 31 34
2010 27 30 34 29 31 33 29 31 32
2011 29 31 32 28 31 36 27 30 32
2012 29 30 33 29 31 34 29 31 33
2013 28 31 34 28 31 34 29 30 32
2014 28 31 33 29 31 34 29 31 32
2015 29 30 33 29 31 34 30 31 33
2016 28 32 34 28 30 33 29 32 33
2017 29 31 35 29 31 34 29 32 34
2018 29 31 33 28 30 34 29 31 34
2019 29 31 34 29 32 34 30 32 34
2020 29 31 33 29 31 34 28 31 33
2021 30 32 33 29 32 34 29 31 33
2022 28 31 33 28 32 34 28 31 33
2023 28 31 34 28 31 33 29 31 35
2024 29 32 33 29 31 33 30 31 34
2025 29 31 33 30 32 34 29 31 35
2026 29 31 33 29 32 35 29 31 34
2027 30 32 34 29 32 34 29 31 34
2028 29 33 36 29 32 34 29 32 34
2029 29 31 33 28 32 35 29 31 34
2030 29 32 34 30 32 34 30 32 35
2031 30 32 34 29 32 34 30 32 36
2032 30 32 33 29 33 34 30 32 34
2033 29 31 35 30 32 35 30 32 35
2034 29 32 34 29 32 35 30 33 34
2035 30 33 35 30 32 35 28 32 35
2036 29 31 34 28 32 34 30 32 35
2037 29 32 34 29 31 34 31 32 35
2038 27 31 35 30 32 36 30 33 35
2039 29 32 36 28 32 34 30 32 35
2040 29 31 34 29 32 34 29 32 34
2041 28 32 33 29 32 34 29 33 36
2042 30 32 34 29 33 35 29 32 34
2043 29 31 35 29 32 35 30 32 35
2044 29 31 35 29 32 34 30 32 34
2045 28 32 33 30 32 34 30 33 35
2046 28 32 34 30 32 34 30 34 35
2047 29 31 34 29 32 36 30 33 35
2048 30 32 35 31 32 34 29 33 36
2049 28 32 34 29 32 35 30 33 35
2050 30 32 35 29 33 36 31 33 36
2051 28 32 34 29 32 35 29 34 36
2052 30 32 35 29 32 35 31 33 35
2053 29 32 36 30 33 35 30 34 37
2054 30 32 35 30 32 35 31 34 36
2055 28 31 35 28 33 35 30 34 36
2056 28 32 35 29 33 34 30 34 37
2057 28 32 35 30 32 35 30 34 37
2058 29 31 33 30 33 34 32 34 37
2059 28 32 35 31 33 35 30 34 37
2060 29 32 34 31 33 35 29 34 37
2061 28 32 35 31 33 35 31 35 38
2062 29 32 34 30 32 35 30 34 37
2063 30 31 35 31 33 36 30 34 37
2064 27 33 36 29 33 36 31 35 38
2065 29 33 35 30 34 37 32 34 38
2066 30 32 34 29 32 36 31 35 38
2067 28 32 34 29 33 37 32 36 38
2068 30 32 34 31 33 35 31 34 39
2069 29 31 34 30 34 35 32 35 39
2070 30 31 34 30 33 35 31 34 36
2071 29 31 34 31 33 36 31 36 39
2072 29 32 35 30 34 35 33 35 37
2073 29 32 35 31 33 36 31 35 39
2074 29 31 33 30 33 35 32 36 38
2075 29 32 34 29 33 36 32 35 39
2076 29 31 37 31 33 36 32 35 39
2077 29 32 34 29 33 36 33 36 38
2078 28 32 34 30 34 35 33 36 38
2079 29 32 35 30 34 35 33 36 38
2080 29 31 34 31 34 35 31 36 39
2081 29 32 34 30 33 36 32 37 39
2082 29 32 34 29 34 37 33 36 38
2083 29 32 34 30 33 36 32 36 39
2084 29 32 35 31 34 35 32 35 37
2085 29 32 33 31 33 38 34 36 39
2086 29 32 34 31 34 36 33 37 40
2087 29 33 34 29 33 36 31 36 40
2088 31 32 34 31 32 35 34 36 40
2089 29 32 35 30 33 36 32 37 39
2090 30 32 35 30 33 36 33 37 41
2091 30 32 33 31 34 36 33 37 41
2092 30 31 34 31 32 37 34 37 40
2093 29 31 35 31 34 37 34 38 40
2094 28 32 35 31 34 38 33 36 41
2095 29 31 34 31 34 36 34 37 41
2096 30 32 34 30 34 36 32 37 40
2097 29 31 35 30 34 36 32 37 41
2098 29 32 34 30 34 36 34 39 41
2099 30 31 35 31 34 37 33 38 41
2100 30 31 34 29 33 35 34 38 40
Figure 4-2 Changing climate hazards in Ontario (Freeze-Thaw Cycles) Source: Canadian Centre for Climate Services. Return to image
Low Emissions Scenario Medium-Emissions Scenario High-Emissions Scenario
Year Low Median High Low Median High Low Median High
1950 68 80 92 68 80 93 68 80 93
1951 66 80 91 66 80 91 66 80 91
1952 66 78 89 66 78 89 66 78 89
1953 64 78 87 64 78 87 64 78 87
1954 68 81 89 68 81 89 68 82 89
1955 69 76 91 68 76 91 68 76 91
1956 66 78 87 67 76 87 67 76 87
1957 66 80 91 66 80 91 66 80 91
1958 63 76 92 63 77 92 63 77 92
1959 69 82 92 69 81 92 69 81 92
1960 67 80 90 67 80 90 67 80 90
1961 64 77 92 65 77 92 65 77 92
1962 65 78 94 65 79 94 66 79 94
1963 68 82 98 68 82 98 68 82 98
1964 70 82 95 70 81 95 70 81 95
1965 67 76 90 67 76 90 67 75 90
1966 64 81 96 64 81 96 64 81 95
1967 69 81 98 69 81 98 69 81 98
1968 64 77 93 64 77 93 64 77 93
1969 67 78 92 67 78 93 67 78 92
1970 67 80 100 67 80 100 67 80 100
1971 71 79 91 71 79 92 71 79 92
1972 69 82 95 70 83 95 70 83 95
1973 67 79 90 67 79 90 67 79 90
1974 66 77 92 64 76 91 63 76 91
1975 67 77 90 67 77 90 67 77 90
1976 63 77 92 63 77 91 63 77 91
1977 71 84 94 72 84 94 71 84 94
1978 70 77 87 70 78 87 70 78 87
1979 69 82 91 69 81 91 69 81 91
1980 68 75 87 69 75 87 69 76 86
1981 66 78 88 66 78 88 66 78 88
1982 64 76 90 64 77 90 64 76 89
1983 60 77 92 60 77 94 60 76 94
1984 64 80 87 64 79 87 64 80 87
1985 57 73 85 57 73 85 57 72 85
1986 64 77 88 64 77 88 64 77 88
1987 65 77 88 64 77 88 64 76 88
1988 62 75 86 62 75 85 62 75 85
1989 61 77 89 61 77 89 61 77 89
1990 65 76 91 65 76 91 65 76 91
1991 65 75 88 65 76 88 65 75 88
1992 66 75 90 66 74 90 65 75 90
1993 68 77 93 68 78 95 69 78 95
1994 63 77 86 63 78 88 63 77 88
1995 66 76 92 66 76 91 66 75 92
1996 67 76 89 68 76 89 68 76 89
1997 63 78 90 63 77 90 63 77 90
1998 65 74 89 65 74 89 65 74 89
1999 64 79 90 64 79 90 64 79 89
2000 63 77 86 64 77 89 64 77 89
2001 66 75 84 66 75 84 66 75 84
2002 68 79 91 67 79 91 66 79 91
2003 58 75 84 59 75 87 59 75 86
2004 63 74 89 63 74 88 63 74 88
2005 65 79 95 65 78 91 66 78 91
2006 61 71 83 62 76 93 64 75 91
2007 64 79 92 64 78 90 63 75 87
2008 63 76 85 61 77 86 63 77 92
2009 65 78 92 63 78 93 64 77 90
2010 67 75 88 61 71 86 60 72 86
2011 59 72 82 61 79 91 64 75 87
2012 62 76 88 63 75 91 59 74 89
2013 63 75 86 62 78 93 61 75 87
2014 60 73 87 62 73 85 57 68 85
2015 60 73 88 60 73 85 58 71 83
2016 61 71 90 61 72 82 58 73 87
2017 57 70 87 62 74 85 63 73 86
2018 61 77 92 60 71 82 63 75 94
2019 64 75 88 59 71 85 59 74 89
2020 63 72 84 59 73 85 58 70 88
2021 63 74 83 59 73 87 62 70 83
2022 61 72 90 61 75 87 62 71 86
2023 63 75 87 64 73 88 59 70 85
2024 57 71 84 62 75 88 57 72 88
2025 55 70 90 63 74 87 56 70 84
2026 57 72 83 61 75 92 56 72 85
2027 60 75 87 61 70 87 61 69 82
2028 60 75 88 62 72 89 59 69 85
2029 61 75 89 59 69 84 60 74 83
2030 61 75 85 59 70 84 59 73 82
2031 59 73 86 60 69 93 58 67 81
2032 60 74 84 60 72 84 56 70 87
2033 64 76 87 59 72 84 60 70 82
2034 58 70 85 57 69 89 58 69 83
2035 60 73 84 59 72 80 55 75 86
2036 60 72 86 61 74 89 59 71 84
2037 58 72 84 58 72 83 57 71 86
2038 59 74 90 65 77 89 59 72 85
2039 60 72 87 60 71 83 57 71 86
2040 62 73 91 57 69 87 56 65 89
2041 56 71 83 55 72 85 54 69 81
2042 59 68 85 55 69 80 53 65 86
2043 59 70 76 54 70 85 57 69 85
2044 53 72 84 58 71 87 58 70 81
2045 61 74 84 60 74 85 59 66 81
2046 59 72 84 59 71 87 53 66 83
2047 60 72 84 58 69 82 57 67 83
2048 56 72 93 59 69 81 52 67 79
2049 56 71 86 56 73 82 56 68 85
2050 59 72 84 57 71 83 56 68 83
2051 58 76 91 56 66 86 55 66 80
2052 59 70 89 56 70 86 56 66 83
2053 60 73 88 59 70 86 58 73 88
2054 58 76 89 58 70 90 55 67 76
2055 54 71 84 54 73 84 57 68 79
2056 61 75 83 54 72 86 54 70 86
2057 60 73 86 54 69 84 56 66 83
2058 57 72 87 56 69 87 53 65 79
2059 62 72 83 54 69 84 52 67 88
2060 60 74 86 53 69 84 52 68 83
2061 55 71 87 58 73 87 53 67 82
2062 58 69 87 60 72 85 52 65 76
2063 55 72 87 53 69 86 54 66 87
2064 54 72 89 55 74 88 54 66 86
2065 58 73 82 55 71 87 60 69 81
2066 59 74 85 53 70 83 55 71 78
2067 57 69 84 60 72 87 50 63 75
2068 60 75 87 58 73 89 52 70 85
2069 60 71 85 57 69 83 54 65 81
2070 62 75 88 56 67 78 53 68 85
2071 55 72 82 58 70 84 52 66 77
2072 57 72 86 53 68 81 53 66 79
2073 58 73 84 59 69 84 54 66 83
2074 59 68 83 55 64 81 53 66 81
2075 57 70 83 52 68 88 52 64 81
2076 59 70 83 53 69 88 53 67 83
2077 57 74 87 57 68 89 55 63 79
2078 58 71 91 55 68 83 50 63 81
2079 57 71 83 54 70 81 50 66 81
2080 56 74 88 50 66 83 56 66 82
2081 56 69 83 55 64 79 53 65 81
2082 57 72 87 52 69 84 50 66 80
2083 58 70 87 56 70 86 53 68 84
2084 58 70 88 57 74 96 52 65 86
2085 61 70 84 55 65 77 50 63 81
2086 62 77 88 51 68 85 50 64 78
2087 62 72 90 58 71 85 50 59 80
2088 55 71 90 58 70 82 48 66 90
2089 58 75 84 57 67 81 48 64 86
2090 56 75 85 55 69 86 53 69 85
2091 56 73 88 56 69 83 43 64 80
2092 62 75 88 57 72 86 56 67 81
2093 59 73 81 57 71 84 51 63 81
2094 59 73 85 55 67 84 51 65 83
2095 59 72 87 55 67 82 50 64 80
2096 54 68 86 57 70 85 54 65 81
2097 56 72 87 59 68 79 51 66 75
2098 58 72 85 53 67 82 51 63 79
2099 58 73 92 58 71 86 49 64 81
2100 60 76 89 48 67 87 48 63 81
Figure 4-3 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario Damage 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Medium Low $0 $2 $5 $9 $13 $18 $24 $27 $29
Median $0 $5 $12 $22 $34 $43 $54 $64 $66
High $1 $10 $19 $49 $65 $88 $103 $126 $134
High Low $0 $2 $6 $12 $20 $28 $40 $49 $55
Median $0 $6 $14 $26 $42 $60 $77 $104 $116
High $1 $10 $20 $54 $77 $106 $143 $188 $232
Figure 5-1 Ontario’s public buildings have long remaining useful lives Source: FAO. Return to image
Remaining useful life categories Proportion of building assets in different remaining useful life categories by CRV (Per Cent)
Beyond Useful Life 3
0-20 years 11
20-40 years 18
40-60 years 20
60-80 years 27
80-100 years 15
More than 100 years 7
Figure 5-2 Examples of building component adaptations to extreme rainfall and extreme heat Note: For more examples of how these climate hazards impact building components, see WSP 2021. Source: WSP. Return to image
Civil and Landscaping Stormwater ponds, infiltration galleries, and retention or detention tanks to slow and minimize rainwater runoff rate and quantity.
Structure Upgrade roof structure to handle greater loading due to stormwater detention. Costs could also include the addition of waterproof membranes and drains.
Envelope Finishes on the exterior need to be more sustainable to withstand heat and maintain the thermal protection of the indoor environment, shielding other building components from much of the stress of extreme heat events.
Roof drainage needs to be sized for future rainfall projections and sufficiently graded to limit ponding.
Mechanical and Electrical New or added cooling capacity will be required to maintain comfort conditions indoors.
Equipment and Finishing Relocate exterior equipment outside of potential flooding areas due to increase in frequency and intensity of short-duration / high-intensity rainfall events.
Figure 5-3 The reactive adaptation strategy has fewer assets adapted by 2100 Source: FAO. Return to image
Proportion of Adapted Public Buildings (Per Cent Share of CRV) Reactive Adaptation Proactive Adaptation
2022 1 8
2023 1 10
2024 1 14
2025 1 21
2026 1 23
2027 1 25
2028 2 28
2029 2 31
2030 2 36
2031 2 40
2032 3 43
2033 3 49
2034 4 51
2035 4 54
2036 5 56
2037 9 61
2038 9 68
2039 11 71
2040 12 73
2041 14 75
2042 15 79
2043 16 81
2044 17 81
2045 18 83
2046 19 87
2047 21 88
2048 22 90
2049 23 91
2050 24 92
2051 25 95
2052 26 98
2053 26 98
2054 27 98
2055 28 99
2056 29 99
2057 29 99
2058 30 99
2059 31 99
2060 32 100
2061 34 100
2062 35 100
2063 36 100
2064 36 100
2065 37 100
2066 38 100
2067 39 100
2068 40 100
2069 41 100
2070 43 100
2071 45 100
2072 46 100
2073 47 100
2074 47 100
2075 48 100
2076 49 100
2077 50 100
2078 50 100
2079 51 100
2080 52 100
2081 53 100
2082 54 100
2083 56 100
2084 59 100
2085 59 100
2086 62 100
2087 64 100
2088 65 100
2089 65 100
2090 68 100
2091 69 100
2092 72 100
2093 73 100
2094 74 100
2095 75 100
2096 75 100
2097 76 100
2098 76 100
2099 76 100
2100 77 100
Figure 5-4 The reactive adaptation strategy will see gradual rise in costs throughout the 21st century Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Medium Low $0 $2 $6 $11 $14 $18 $21 $24 $22
Median $1 $5 $14 $24 $35 $41 $49 $56 $52
High $1 $10 $20 $51 $63 $84 $92 $108 $108
High Low $0 $2 $8 $15 $24 $30 $40 $46 $44
Median $1 $7 $17 $31 $47 $62 $74 $92 $91
High $1 $11 $24 $61 $81 $106 $134 $158 $174
Figure 5-5 Proactively adapting all public buildings would require significant near-term investment Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Medium Low $1 $7 $15 $20 $21 $22 $25 $24 $23
Median $3 $15 $29 $39 $47 $49 $53 $57 $54
High $4 $26 $49 $68 $79 $82 $93 $95 $98
High Low $3 $15 $31 $42 $47 $51 $55 $51 $51
Median $5 $26 $53 $71 $83 $89 $97 $103 $104
High $7 $42 $82 $117 $133 $141 $158 $165 $174
Figure 6-1 Asset management strategies to cope with extreme rainfall and heat have different cost profiles Notes: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: FAO. Return to image
2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
High Emissions Scenario Reactive Adaptation $1 $7 $17 $31 $47 $62 $74 $92 $91
Proactive Adaptation $5 $26 $53 $71 $83 $89 $97 $103 $104
No Adaptation $0 $6 $14 $26 $42 $60 $77 $104 $116
Medium Emissions Scenario Reactive Adaptation $1 $5 $14 $24 $35 $41 $49 $56 $52
Proactive Adaptation $3 $15 $29 $39 $47 $49 $53 $57 $54
No Adaptation $0 $5 $12 $22 $34 $43 $54 $64 $66
Figure 7-1 The useful service life of public buildings will decline due to projected changes in extreme heat, extreme rainfall and freeze-thaw cycles in the absence of adaptation actions Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum
2020s -4 -2 0 -4 -2 0
2030s -5 -2 -1 -5 -3 0
2040s -6 -3 -1 -8 -3 -1
2050s -8 -3 -1 -10 -5 -1
2060s -9 -3 -1 -13 -6 -2
2070s -10 -4 -1 -16 -7 -2
2080s -10 -4 -1 -20 -9 -3
2090s -10 -4 -1 -24 -11 -4
2100s -10 -4 -1 -28 -12 -4
Figure 7-2 More extreme rainfall is the biggest factor accelerating the deterioration of public buildings Note: These values are based on the median (50th percentile) Ontario average climate projections using the estimates of “most likely” engineering outcome. The range of climate and engineering uncertainties has been omitted in this figure for presentation purposes. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario Extreme Rainfall Freeze-Thaw Cycles Extreme Heat Total
2020s -1.7 0.3 -0.2 -1.7
2030s -2.1 0.5 -0.3 -2.0
2040s -2.6 0.4 -0.4 -2.6
2050s -3.1 0.5 -0.5 -3.1
2060s -3.5 0.5 -0.6 -3.5
2070s -3.8 0.7 -0.7 -3.8
2080s -3.8 0.7 -0.7 -3.9
2090s -3.9 0.8 -0.8 -4.0
2100s -4.0 0.8 -0.9 -4.1
High Emissions Scenario Extreme Rainfall Freeze-Thaw Cycles Extreme Heat Total
2020s -1.9 0.4 -0.3 -1.9
2030s -2.6 0.5 -0.5 -2.6
2040s -3.4 0.6 -0.6 -3.4
2050s -4.6 0.7 -0.8 -4.7
2060s -5.7 0.7 -1.1 -6.1
2070s -6.9 0.8 -1.4 -7.5
2080s -8.1 0.9 -1.7 -8.9
2090s -9.4 0.9 -2.1 -10.6
2100s -10.7 1.0 -2.6 -12.3
Figure 7-3 Projected changes in extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles will raise the O&M expenses of Ontario’s public buildings in the absence of adaptation actions Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum
2020s 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3
2030s 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.4
2040s 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.5
2050s 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.7
2060s 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.6 1.0
2070s 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.7 1.2
2080s 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.9 1.4
2090s 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.6 1.0 1.7
2100s 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.7 1.2 2.0
Figure 7-4 More intense rainfall will contribute the most to rising O&M costs for public buildings Note: These values are based on the median (50th percentile) Ontario average climate projections using the estimates of “most likely” engineering outcome. The range of climate and engineering uncertainties has been omitted in this figure for presentation purposes. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario Extreme Rainfall Freeze-Thaw Cycles Extreme Heat Total
2020 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2
2030 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2
2040 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
2050 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
2060 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4
2070 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4
2080 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4
2090 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.4
2100 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.4
High Emissions Scenario Extreme Rainfall Freeze-Thaw Cycles Extreme Heat Total
2020 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2
2030 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
2040 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4
2050 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.5
2060 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6
2070 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.7
2080 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.9
2090 0.9 0.0 0.1 1.0
2100 1.0 0.0 0.2 1.2
Figure 7-5 The cost of retrofitting Ontario’s public buildings to withstand extreme rainfall and heat will depend on the extent of climate change Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum
2020s 3 5 7 3 5 8
2030s 4 6 10 4 7 11
2040s 5 7 12 6 10 15
2050s 5 9 15 8 13 19
2060s 5 10 17 10 16 25
2070s 6 11 19 12 20 32
2080s 6 11 19 14 23 39
2090s 6 11 19 16 27 46
2100s 6 12 19 18 32 55
Figure 7-6 The cost of adapting Ontario’s public buildings at renewal to withstand extreme rainfall and heat will depend on the extent of climate change Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) climate projection using “most likely” engineering outcomes. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario given climate and engineering uncertainty. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum
2020s 2 2 3 2 3 4
2030s 2 3 5 3 4 5
2040s 3 4 6 4 5 7
2050s 3 5 7 5 7 9
2060s 3 5 8 6 8 12
2070s 3 6 9 7 10 15
2080s 3 6 9 8 12 18
2090s 4 6 9 9 14 22
2100s 4 6 9 10 17 26
Figure 7-7 The present value cost of each asset management strategy under different discount rates Note: The costs presented use the median (50th percentile) climate projections and “most likely” engineering costs. Source: FAO. Return to image
Medium Emissions Scenario 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0%
No Adaptation $66 $55 $46 $40 $34 $30 $26 $23 $20 $18 $17 $15 $14 $13 $12
Reactive Adaptation $52 $45 $39 $35 $31 $27 $24 $22 $20 $18 $17 $15 $14 $13 $12
Proactive Adaptation $54 $49 $44 $41 $37 $35 $32 $30 $29 $27 $26 $24 $23 $22 $21
High Emissions Scenario 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0%
No Adaptation $116 $94 $76 $63 $52 $44 $38 $33 $28 $25 $22 $20 $18 $16 $15
Reactive Adaptation $91 $76 $64 $55 $47 $41 $36 $32 $28 $25 $23 $21 $19 $18 $16
Proactive Adaptation $104 $93 $84 $76 $69 $64 $59 $55 $52 $49 $46 $44 $41 $40 $38
Figure 7-8 More extreme rainfall and heat will raise the cost of maintaining the current portfolio of public buildings by $43 billion in the low emissions scenario in the absence of adaptation Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario Estimate 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Low Low $0 $2 $5 $8 $9 $12 $16 $18 $18
Median $0 $4 $11 $18 $28 $34 $40 $45 $43
High $1 $8 $20 $40 $50 $69 $75 $86 $89
Medium Low $0 $2 $5 $9 $13 $18 $24 $27 $29
Median $0 $5 $12 $22 $34 $43 $54 $64 $66
High $1 $10 $19 $49 $65 $88 $103 $126 $134
High Low $0 $2 $6 $12 $20 $28 $40 $49 $55
Median $0 $6 $14 $26 $42 $60 $77 $104 $116
High $1 $10 $20 $54 $77 $106 $143 $188 $232
Figure 7-9 A reactive adaptation strategy, where buildings are adapted when renewed at the end of their service life to withstand the impacts of more extreme rainfall and heat, will add $35 billion in infrastructure costs over the century in the low emissions scenario Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario Estimate 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Low Low $0 $2 $5 $8 $9 $11 $15 $16 $15
Median $0 $4 $12 $19 $27 $31 $36 $39 $35
High $1 $9 $21 $40 $48 $61 $68 $74 $74
Medium Low $0 $2 $6 $11 $14 $18 $21 $24 $22
Median $1 $5 $14 $24 $35 $41 $49 $56 $52
High $1 $10 $20 $51 $63 $84 $92 $108 $108
High Low $0 $2 $8 $15 $24 $30 $40 $46 $44
Median $1 $7 $17 $31 $47 $62 $74 $92 $91
High $1 $11 $24 $61 $81 $106 $134 $158 $174
Figure 7-10 A proactive adaptation strategy, where buildings are adapted at the earliest opportunity to withstand the impacts of more extreme rainfall and heat, will add $33 billion in infrastructure costs over the century in the low emissions scenario Note: The solid line is the median (or 50th percentile) projection. The coloured bands represent the range of possible outcomes in each emissions scenario. The costs presented in this chart are in addition to the projected baseline costs over the same period. Source: WSP and FAO. Return to image
Emissions Scenario Estimate 2022 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Low Low $1 $5 $10 $12 $13 $13 $15 $14 $14
Median $2 $9 $19 $26 $30 $32 $34 $36 $33
High $3 $18 $35 $46 $55 $58 $66 $67 $69
Medium Low $1 $7 $15 $20 $21 $22 $25 $24 $23
Median $3 $15 $29 $39 $47 $49 $53 $57 $54
High $4 $26 $49 $68 $79 $82 $93 $95 $98
High Low $3 $15 $31 $42 $47 $51 $55 $51 $51
Median $5 $26 $53 $71 $83 $89 $97 $103 $104
High $7 $42 $82 $117 $133 $141 $158 $165 $174

Footnotes

[3] This is the current replacement value in 2020 dollars.

[4] All cost estimates are in 2020 undiscounted real dollars unless otherwise stated.

[5] Numbers may not add due to rounding.

[6] In the medium emissions scenario, global emissions begin to decline in the 2050s and the global mean temperature is held to a 2.3°C increase relative to 1850-1900.

[7] In the high emissions scenario, emissions continue to rise throughout the century and the global mean temperature increases by 4.2°C by late century relative to 1850-1900.

[8] Since freeze-thaw cycles decrease in both emissions scenarios, buildings are not adapted to this climate hazard.

[9] Once adapted, public buildings no longer suffer accelerated deterioration or higher operations and maintenance expenses due to extreme rainfall and extreme heat.

[10] These adaptation costs are implemented to withstand the climate impacts associated with the median projections for extreme rainfall and extreme heat. See Chapter 5 for the full range of possible cost outcomes.

[11] The planned or unplanned disruption of public services can result in lost work time, business losses or other economic disruptions.

[12] On a discounted basis, the reactive adaptation strategy remains the lowest cost strategy at discount rates below 4.5 to 5.5 per cent depending on the emissions scenario. See Appendix D for details.

[13] Current replacement value is the current cost of rebuilding an asset with the equivalent capacity, functionality and performance.

[15] See Appendix A for a detailed breakdown of building infrastructure by sectors.

[16] Rehabilitation means repairing part or most of an asset to extend its service life, without adding to its capacity, functionality or performance. Rehabilitation is different from maintenance, which is the routine activities performed on an asset that maximize service life and minimize service disruptions. Assets are rehabilitated to a benchmarked “state of good repair” target and not to a new condition. For more information on the asset management framework used in this report see: Financial Accountability Office of Ontario, 2021b.

[17] Renewal is the replacement of an existing asset, resulting in a new or as-new asset with an equivalent capacity, functionality and performance as the original asset. Renewal is different from rehabilitation, as renewal rebuilds the entire asset.

[18] For more details see: Financial Accountability Office of Ontario, 2020, Provincial Infrastructure and Financial Accountability Office of Ontario, 2021a, Municipal Infrastructure.

[19] This report only examines the existing suite of public buildings; it excludes assets that are currently under construction, planned for future construction or necessary to meet future infrastructure demand.

[20] In this report, a “stable climate” means that all climate indicators for extreme rainfall, extreme heat and freeze-thaw cycles remain unchanged from their 1975-2005 average levels over the projection to 2100.

[21] This analysis assumes all assets are rehabilitated and renewed as soon as the need arises. In practice, infrastructure backlogs exist, and maintaining assets in a state of good repair is only one aspect of asset management and may conflict with other budgetary priorities governments face.

[22] International Institute of Sustainable Development, 2021. Warren, F. and Lulham, N., editors, 2021, Section 6.4.

[23] Numerous potentially significant climate hazards such as wildfires and fluvial flooding were not included. See the FAO’s Costing Climate Change Impacts to Public Infrastructure: Project Backgrounder and Methodology and WSP’s Costing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation for Provincial and Municipal Public Infrastructure in Ontario reports for more information.

[24] National Building Code of Canada 2015, Table C-2. 2012 Building Code Compendium: Supplementary Standard SB-1, Ministry of Municipal Affairs.

[25] Extreme rainfall is usually defined as rainfall events with daily or sub-daily duration for a given return period of two to 100 years. For example, 15-min rainfall with 10-year return period and one-day maximum rainfall with 50-year return period are climate design variables listed in the National Building Code of Canada 2015.

[26] The FAO’s modelling approach captures the impacts of both chronic and acute hazards by averaging out extreme events across regions and over long periods of time.

[27] See Appendix B for a more detailed description of the climate hazards and their projections.

[28] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013, Table All.7.5. Ranges for the global mean surface temperature represent the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile projections of models used.

[29] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fifth comprehensive assessment (AR5), released in 2013, produced four scenarios called Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). The low emissions scenario corresponds to RCP2.6, the medium emissions scenario corresponds to RCP4.5 and the high emissions scenario corresponds to RCP8.5. See the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Synthesis Report. The IPCC’s sixth assessment (AR6), released in 2021, contains five updated scenarios called Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs), which line up with the RCPs from AR5 in terms of average warming. This means that the RCP scenarios from AR5 are still relevant.

[30] Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, 2021.

[31] See Appendix C for details.

[32] This is the average of the increase in cumulative costs in the median projection of the medium and high emissions scenarios, which are $5 billion and $6 billion, respectively.

[33] These results are for the median projections in the medium and high emissions scenarios, respectively.

[34] As the annual number of freeze-thaw cycles is projected to decline in all scenarios, this climate hazard is excluded from the analysis in this chapter.

[35] See Infrastructure Canada’s Climate Lens for a general guidance on different factors to consider when making adaptation decisions.

[36] While the climate data underlying current versions of building codes are based on historical observations (see National Building Code of Canada 2015, Table C-2 and 2012 Building Code Compendium: Supplementary Standard SB-1, Ministry of Municipal Affairs), numerous efforts are under way to integrate climate change considerations into the management of public buildings. At the federal level, the Climate-Resilient Buildings and Core Public Infrastructure initiative has supported the development of forward-looking climate data, which could be integrated into the 2025 edition of the National Building Code, and eventually into the Ontario Building Code (see Cannon, A.J., Jeong, D.I., Zhang, X., and Zwiers, F.W., 2020).

[37] See Canada’s Climate Change Adaptation Platform and Warren, F. and Lulham, N., editors, 2021, Box 2.3. In addition, O.Reg. 588/17, as amended by O.Reg. 193/21, requires municipalities to consider actions to address vulnerabilities in their infrastructure assets that may be caused by climate change.

[41] For a full description of adaptation examples see WSP 2021.

[42] The 2080s are selected to approximate the changes in climate in the latter half of the 21st century. For details, see Appendix C.

[43] However, after a building is adapted, its CRV increases to reflect the addition of climate hazard–resilient components, increasing the expenses associated with maintaining adapted assets in a state of good repair.

[44] A retrofit is an adaptation made during the building’s service life. Adapting as a retrofit to an existing building typically costs more than adapting while designing and constructing a replacement building.

[45] These adaptation costs are implemented to withstand the climate impacts associated with the median projections for extreme rainfall and extreme heat.

[46] These results are based on the median projection in each emissions scenario. While the results hold true at the portfolio level across most climate scenarios, the optimal adaptation strategy for individual assets may vary based on the specific characteristics of the assets. See chapter 6 for details.

[47] Adapting to more extreme climate hazards would be more expensive than adapting to less extreme hazards. See Appendix D for details.

[48] For a discussion and presentation of results on a discounted basis, see Appendix E.

[49] Several decision-making tools can be used to assist climate change adaptation decisions that captures both financial and economic costs and benefits of adaptation. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014 and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2011 for details on different decision tools, OECD 2018 for a general discussion on costs and benefits of adaptation, and Government of Canada, 2019 for a general guidance on adaptation decisions.

[50] For discussions on the value of indirect benefits of adaptation and the indirect costs of service disruption in the context of building infrastructure, see Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, 2020 and UNEP, 2021. For a discussion on the magnitude of indirect costs and benefits in the context of other sectors, see Neumann, J.E., Chinowsky, P., Helman, J.et al., 2021.

[51] In addition, Ontario’s school boards own roughly 7,000 portables. However, these assets are excluded from the FAO’s analysis.

[52] See WSP 2021.

[54] For a discussion on the importance of discount rate in evaluating climate adaptation projects, see the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014.

[55] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013, Table All.7.5. Ranges for the global mean surface temperature represent the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile projections of models used.

Related posts

  • Aug 17, 2021

    This report reviews the infrastructure assets owned by Ontario municipalities, assesses the condition of those assets, and estimates the cost to bring these assets into a state of good repair.

    Read More

  • Nov 26, 2020

    This report reviews the infrastructure assets owned by the Province, assesses the state of repair of those assets, and estimates the cost to bring the Province’s assets into a state of good repair in 2020-21 and over the next ten years.

    Read More

  • Dec 7, 2021

    This report introduces the Costing Climate Change Impacts on Public Infrastructure project, which provides projections of the long-term costs that certain climate change hazards will impose on Ontario’s provincial and municipal infrastructure budgets. The report outlines the context and methodology, describes the climate hazards included in the project, and discusses the projections of these hazards to public infrastructure. Results will be published in three sector reports for buildings, transportation, and water infrastructure.

    Read More