MLI Select energy points, explained.
The category that rewards engineering decisions rather than revenue concessions. It is also the category most often left until the drawings are already frozen.
Two different measurement bases
Energy scoring works differently depending on whether the building exists. On an existing building, performance is measured as a percentage reduction against what the building consumes and emits today. On new construction, it is measured as a percentage better than the national energy code baseline. Same category, entirely different arithmetic, and mixing the two up is how a project ends up chasing a tier it was never positioned for.
The practical asymmetry is that an older building with poor mechanical systems has a generous baseline to improve from, while a new building is measured against a code that is already reasonably efficient. Retrofitting a 1970s walk up to a 25% reduction is often achievable with work that pays for itself in operating cost. Designing a new build 50% better than code is a real engineering programme with real capital attached.
The thresholds
Energy contributes up to 50 points, which on its own is enough to qualify a file.
Existing buildings
Reduction in energy use and emissions against current performance.
- 15% reduction earns 20 points
- 25% reduction earns 35 points
- 40% reduction earns 50 points
New construction
Performance measured against the national energy code baseline.
- Roughly 25% better earns 20 points
- Roughly 50% better earns 35 points
- Roughly 60% better earns 50 points
On existing buildings this is frequently the category that carries the file, because the affordability thresholds on an existing asset are steep. On new construction, energy usually tops up a score that affordability has already largely built.
Why the modelling decides the score
Certified energy modelling is required, and CMHC has attestation standards the report has to meet. A model is not a formality attached to the submission. It is the evidence the points rest on, and its quality varies enormously between practitioners.
Two failures recur. The first is a modeller who has not done CMHC work before, producing a report that either scores the building below what it genuinely achieves or comes back for rework, which on an insured timeline costs weeks. The second, and the more expensive one, is timing. When the modeller arrives after the drawings are frozen, the report can only measure decisions already made. Glazing ratio, envelope assembly, mechanical selection and heat recovery are all cheap to change on paper and costly to change on site.
Bring the modeller in at concept stage. That single sequencing change is the biggest practical lesson in this category, and it routinely moves a project a full tier for a fraction of what the same tier costs when bought late through equipment upgrades.
BC incentives change the tier decision
Where a higher tier needs energy work to reach it, CleanBC and BC Hydro incentives can offset part of that upgrade cost, which sometimes changes the answer. A heat pump programme, envelope improvement or ventilation upgrade evaluated on gross capital cost can look like a poor trade for 15 extra points, and then look obvious once the incentive is applied.
So the tier decision should be run net of incentives, and it should be run before the design is committed rather than after. The comparison that matters is the after incentive cost of the upgrade against the value of the additional points in loan proceeds, premium discount and amortization. On a building of any scale that second number is usually larger than owners expect.
September 30, 2026: the energy scoring window closes.
Until September 30, 2026, CMHC accepts energy attestations under the older 2015 National Building Code and 2017 energy code baselines. After that date, all new applications are scored against the 2020 codes, which are themselves more efficient, meaning the identical building design earns fewer energy points. Projects already in design that submit before the deadline lock in the more favourable scoring. Projects starting later should be modelled against the 2020 baseline from day one, and underwritten to work at the 70 point tier in case the 100 point tier is out of reach. In BC, CleanBC and BC Hydro incentives can offset a meaningful share of the upgrade costs needed to buy the points back.
Energy scoring questions we hear most
Keep going on MLI Select
Let's score the building properly.
Send the drawings or the capital plan. We will tell you which energy tier is reachable and what it is worth in proceeds before anyone spends money on it.