What Ontario Businesses Should Expect From a Commercial Energy Audit in 2027

A commercial energy audit is the engineering work that answers a decision every facility owner or manager eventually faces: which energy improvements should the business prioritize, and what evidence is needed before committing capital? It documents how your facility uses energy, including electricity and fuels such as natural gas, and then turns that into a costed, ranked plan.

A well-scoped audit delivers a baseline of current energy consumption, the opportunities identified (from operational fixes to capital upgrades), estimated costs, savings, and assumptions for each, and prioritized recommendations. With those, you can decide where operational improvements make sense, which upgrades justify investment, whether onsite solar belongs in the plan, and what the findings mean for both energy costs and emissions.

In Ontario, particularly in 2026 and beyond, changing electricity and carbon costs and rules have made commercial energy audits increasingly important. This article covers what to expect from a commercial energy audit: what it evaluates and the decision each part supports, how the ASHRAE energy audit levels differ, what the analysis covers, and which funding opportunities to aim for before the new year.

What a Commercial Energy Audit Actually Evaluates

At its core, a commercial energy audit is a deep-dive into how, where, when, and how much energy your facility consumes. By understanding the energy consumption, the auditor can make recommendations for improvement in energy efficiency. The typical scope of a commercial energy audit in Ontario covers the following:

• The building envelope: Insulation, glazing, air leakage, and roofing.
• Mechanical systems: Boilers, chillers, rooftop units, air handlers, ventilation, and heat recovery.
• Electrical systems: Lighting, motors, variable frequency drives (VFDs), power factor, and demand peaks.
• Controls: The building automation system (BAS), schedules, setpoints, and sequences of operation.
• Process loads: Compressed air, refrigeration, process heating, and other production equipment in industrial and food facilities.
• Operations: Occupancy patterns, maintenance practices, and how staff actually run the equipment.

In the end, the auditor creates a report with a baseline of energy consumption and the energy conservation measures (ECMs) identified, such as lighting upgrades, controls changes, or heat recovery, ranked in order of each measure’s financial impact. Some elements depend on the agreed scope: water use, an energy-related greenhouse gas (GHG) baseline, and a solar screening are included only when they are scoped in, and they are covered below.

What this decides: Whether the facility has enough room to improve to justify further investment, and which systems deserve attention first.

ASHRAE Energy Audit Levels: Level 1 vs Level 2 vs Level 3

Energy audits are not random. They follow a standardized procedure set out by ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) in ASHRAE Standard 211, the standard for commercial building energy audits. It defines three audit levels, and each level builds on the one before it:

Which Audit Level Funding Programs Ask For

In Ontario, Level 2 is a common working level, as it covers the majority of facility types, sizes and requirements. The choice of audit level can often also impact funding availability. Funding programs set their own audit requirements, so check the specific program before choosing a level. For example, Enbridge Gas lists ASHRAE Level 2 as the minimum for HVAC and controls audits under its 2026 commercial assessment incentives; other programs differ.

Utility Bill and Interval Data Analysis

Before even setting foot in your facility, the auditor will ask for your energy consumption data. Auditors typically request your facility’s 12- to 36-month electricity and gas bills, plus interval data (for example, 15-minute readings) where your utility provides it and the scope calls for it. Interval data offers a closer look at consumption patterns. Where it is not available, the analysis relies on monthly billing data, and the auditor may recommend short-term metering.

This data answers certain questions that a monthly bill cannot. Below are some examples:

• Base load and weather-driven load: The amount of energy used when the building is empty, when it is full, and when it is subject to notable variations in the weather, leading to fluctuations in the cooling and heating requirements.
• Demand peaks: When peaks typically occur, how long they last, and what causes them.
• Rate fit: Whether your tariff, Global Adjustment (GA) exposure, and peak timing match your operational patterns.

What this decides: Whether your cost problem is how much energy you use, when you use it, or how you are billed for it. That determines whether to focus on efficiency, load management, or rate fit.

What to Have Ready Before the Site Visit

Along with the bills and interval data, gathering these before the audit starts shortens the site visit and cuts follow-up requests:

• Mechanical and electrical drawings for the building
• An equipment list with operating hours and temperature setpoints
• BAS schedules and current sequences of operation
• Planned changes, such as expansions, new production lines or equipment replacements

On-Site Assessment: HVAC, BAS, Motors and Process Loads

These are the systems that run for most hours of the year, and their performance often drifts from the original design intent, so an audit examines them closely. An audit typically checks the following:

• HVAC: Equipment age and efficiency, simultaneous heating and cooling, economizer function, ventilation rates, and heat recovery potential.
• BAS and controls: Overridden schedules, setpoint drift, poor reset strategies, out-of-calibration sensors, and outdated sequences that no longer match how the building is used.
• Motors and drives: Oversized, outdated motors, fans and pumps that run at full speed regardless of load.
• Process loads: Compressed-air leaks, refrigeration head pressure, process heat recovery and equipment idling between shifts.

What the audit finds depends on the facility. In the Ontario fulfillment facility described in the project box below, two of the larger identified opportunities concerned how existing rooftop HVAC equipment is operated and controlled: economizer recommissioning ($39,894 per year in identified savings potential) and supply-fan VFD optimization ($30,321 per year). Neither was a like-for-like equipment replacement.

What this decides: Which fixes can be made through recommissioning and controls, and which equipment genuinely needs to be replaced.

Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) and How They Are Ranked

Quite often, the primary goal of an energy audit is to identify measures that can reduce energy use and therefore running costs. Auditors generally categorize ECMs according to the effort or cost of implementation, rather than by equipment type. Here’s an overview of the categories:

• No-cost or low-cost: Schedule corrections, setpoint resets, leak repair, sensor recalibration, etc.
• Retrofit: LED lighting, VFDs, control upgrades, heat recovery, etc.
• Capital: Chiller or rooftop unit replacement, envelope upgrades, electrification and heat pump conversion. While often seen as a part of capital ECM, onsite solar is a different kind of investment and is covered separately below.

To turn the list into a plan, ECMs are ranked on a common financial basis, such as simple payback, net present value, or savings per dollar invested, after any available incentives. Measures also interact: a lighting retrofit reduces cooling load, and a controls fix can reduce the size of the equipment you need to buy. That is why operational fixes are usually sequenced first and new equipment sized afterwards.

What this decides: Which measures to do now, which to schedule into the capital plan, and which to defer.

How Efficiency, Solar and Emissions Analysis Fit Together

The same operating data supports three related questions. How much energy does the facility need? How much of that could be avoided through efficiency measures? And how much of what remains could be supplied onsite? Answering them in that order matters, because efficiency measures reduce load and a solar system sized to the original load can end up larger than the upgraded facility needs.

Efficiency measures and onsite generation are different things. Efficiency measures reduce how much energy the facility uses. Solar generation supplies part of the energy the facility still uses, behind the meter. They have different economics and are often funded through different programs, so a report should present them separately even when they come from the same data.

Solar screening and a GHG baseline are not automatic parts of every ASHRAE audit. They are scope items agreed with your auditor. Equally, a solar installation does not require a full energy audit first. An audit adds value when you want solar sized after efficiency measures, or when a funding program asks for one. Say which of these you want in scope before the audit starts.

Solar and DER Feasibility Screening

Many audit providers offer an initial solar feasibility check (and/or checks for other distributed energy resources, or DERs) as an optional scope item. It is a first-pass screening, not a design, and it reuses the load data already collected for the audit.

Such an initial screening typically looks at:

• Roof and site suitability: Roof area, orientation, health and structural capacity, shading, and electrical interconnection.
• Load match: How much of the system’s output can be used behind the meter, and how well the solar production profile matches the facility’s load profile.
• Energy storage and demand management: Whether batteries make a good case by impacting demand or GA charges.
• Incentive availability: What incentives are available and whether the facility is eligible for any of them.

What this decides: Whether to proceed to a detailed solar design, and at what size, once efficiency measures have been accounted for.

Energy and GHG Baseline: EUI, Emissions and Reporting

Where GHG analysis is included in the audit scope, the facility’s energy baseline can also be translated into an energy-related emissions baseline. This allows the financial and emissions impact of potential measures to be compared. This helps you understand the impact of every ECM in tonnes of CO₂e avoided, along with money saved.

The baseline normally includes:

• Annual electricity and natural gas use, by month.
• Energy use intensity (EUI) in kWh or GJ per square metre.
• GHG emissions using current emission factors for Ontario electricity and for natural gas.
• A comparison with similar buildings, where benchmarking data exists.

This baseline can also support energy and water reporting where applicable. Ontario’s Energy and Water Reporting and Benchmarking (EWRB) program generally applies to prescribed buildings of 50,000 square feet or larger, subject to property type and exemptions. Certain manufacturing and processing properties may qualify for an exemption. The City of Toronto has separate reporting requirements and is extending mandatory reporting to buildings of 10,000 square feet and larger starting in 2027.

What this decides: The financial and emissions implications of each potential project, so you can weigh cost, savings, and emissions reduction together.

Energy Audit Funding and Incentives in Ontario for 2027

Ontario businesses can get part of their audit or ECM project’s cost covered by government or utility programs. Funding for the assessment and incentives for implementing the recommended projects are separate, each with its own eligibility rules, caps, and approval steps. The tables below show terms as of October 2026. They are planning context for 2027, not confirmed 2027 offers, so confirm terms once 2027 offers are published.

Funding for the Energy Audit or Feasibility Study

Enbridge assessment funding depends on natural gas use, so a facility that uses little gas will not qualify for it and should confirm eligibility against its own consumption first.

Incentives for Implementing Audit Recommendations

Enbridge Gas also offers fixed-incentive offers for specific equipment, which are separate from the custom retrofit program. Check Enbridge’s commercial incentives page for current equipment lists and caps.

Project Highlight: Recommissioning Audit for an 868,122 sq. ft. Ontario Fulfillment Facility

Client: confidential (fulfillment and distribution, Ontario). Completed with Star Energy Solutions.

What was investigated. A facility-wide recommissioning audit that combined utility analysis, site investigations, operator interviews, functional testing, a BAS review, and a distributed energy evaluation. Electricity made up about 97% of the facility’s $2.34 million annual utility spend, so the work focused on rooftop HVAC, economizers, ventilation, controls, loading bay operations, and power factor.

What was identified. $341,796 in combined annual savings potential: $114,391 from energy conservation measures and $227,406 from proposed rooftop solar PV. Two examples: economizer recommissioning ($39,894 per year), where functional testing found economizer issues limiting free cooling, and VFD optimization of rooftop-unit supply fans ($30,321 per year). The project page also reports a potential GHG reduction of 38.2%.

How it supported investment planning. Each recommendation was evaluated on energy impact, implementation cost, operational considerations, and expected return, then delivered as a prioritized roadmap for phased implementation and capital planning. Efficiency and solar were reported separately: about two-thirds of the headline figure is the solar opportunity, which is its own investment decision.

Note: these figures are identified savings potential from the audit, not achieved savings. Read the full project.