York University
Lassonde School of Engineering
MECH 2112
Mechanical Engineering Professionalism and Society
Carbon Capture Inc
Technical Report - Deliverable D1
Sabriha Amin - sabriha4@my.yorku.ca
Nathan Wong - nathanwo@my.yorku.ca
Omar Zahra - ryan1111@my.yorku.ca
Joseph Thomas - thomas74@my.yorku.ca
Stephanie Katopodis - steph124@my.yorku.ca
Luka Tomovic - lukatomo@my.yorku.ca
Jovial Jacob Ukken - jo2000@my.yorku.ca
Alaa Nasreddeen – 220340733 - alaanasr@my.yorku.ca
February 01, 2026
1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Team Structure and Professional Practice
2.1 Team Contract
2.2 Conflict Resolution Plan:
2.3 Role Assignments
2.4 Functional Role Areas
2.5 RACI Chart
3. Problem Framing and Definition (steph)
3.1 Defined Project Scope and Building Archetypes
3.2 Societal and Engineering Context
3.3 Refined Problem Statement
4. Stakeholders, Ethics, and Equity (Omar)
4.1 Stakeholder Map
4.2 Partner Engagement Plan
4.3 Ethical and Equity Risk Scan
5. Research Methods
5.1 Interview Protocol
5.2 Consent Script
5.3 Recruitment Plan
5.4 Benchmarking Plan
5.5 Data Management Plan
6. Early Findings
7. User and Systems Analysis
7.1 Operator Decision Journey (Summary)
7.2 Systems Map (Description)
8. Design Direction and Success Metrics
8.1 Initial Decision Criteria
8.2 Baseline vs. Target Metrics
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
6
Ошибка! Закладка не определена.
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
List of Tables
Table 1: RACI Chart for Team Roles and Responsibilities ......................................................... 5
Table 2: Stakeholder Map for Building Electrification and Retrofit Decisions .............................. 6
Table 3: Preliminary Design Criteria and Measurable Success Metrics .....................................10
2
1. Introduction
Buildings account for a significant share of greenhouse gas emissions due to their reliance on
fossil-fuel-based heating and cooling systems, making building electrification a critical pathway
toward achieving Net-Zero targets by 2050. However, real-world retrofit efforts are constrained
by limited electrical grid capacity, aging building infrastructure, permitting delays, and shortages
of skilled trades, particularly in dense urban regions such as the Greater Toronto Area. In response,
this project partners with Carbon Cap Inc. to investigate how commercial and residential building
operators can reduce emissions and operating costs during the transition period by strategically
comparing full electrification, hybrid pathways, and interim HVAC efficiency upgrades such as
waste heat recovery. Using a human-centered, evidence-based engineering approach, the team
aims to develop a practical decision-support framework that balances emissions reduction, cost,
feasibility, resilience, and equity under realistic infrastructure constraints.
2. Team Structure and Professional Practice
2.1 Team Contract
The project team commits to professional, ethical, and equitable collaboration throughout the
duration of the Carbon Cap Inc. project. Team members agree to:
1. Communicate respectfully and transparently in all meetings and written communications.
2. Meet agreed-upon deadlines and notify the team in advance if conflicts arise.
3. Share workload equitably and support peers when technical or scheduling challenges
occur.
4. Based decisions on evidence, stakeholder needs, and sustainability principles rather than
individual preference.
2.2 Conflict Resolution Plan:
1. Identify the issue early and discuss it in a scheduled team meeting.
2. Seek consensus using project objectives, stakeholder needs, and grading criteria as decision
anchors.
3. If unresolved, escalate to the Project Manager for mediation.
3
4. As a last resort, consult the course instructor or teaching assistant with documented
evidence of attempts at resolution.
2.3 Role Assignments
1. To support equitable workload distribution, shared leadership development, and
professional engineering practice, this project adopts a distributed role structure with a
rolling Project Manager / Systems Integrator model.
2. The Rolling Project Manager / Systems Integrator is responsible for phase-level
coordination, meeting facilitation, schedule tracking, and integration of technical, social,
and ethical considerations during their assigned period.
3. All team members contribute both technical output and leadership input, with
responsibilities clearly defined through the RACI framework.
2.4 Functional Role Areas
1. Stakeholder Research & Ethics
2. Building Energy Modeling
3. Electrification & Grid Readiness
4. HVAC Efficiency & Waste Heat Recovery
5. Economics & Policy
6. Risk, Feasibility & Operations
7. Data Management & Documentation
2.5 RACI Chart
The detailed distribution of responsibility and accountability for each task is defined using the
RACI Chart. To ensure equitable workload distribution and shared leadership development, the
team will adopt a fully distributed rolling Project Manager / Systems Integrator model.
Rolling Project Manager / Systems Integrator Assignments
1. Weeks 1–2: Sabriha Amin
2. Weeks 3–4: Alaa Nasreddeen
3. Weeks 5–6: Nathan Wong
4. Weeks 7–8: Luka Tomovic
4
5. Weeks 9: Joseph Thomas
6. Weeks 10: Stephanie Katopodis
7. Weeks 11: Omar Zahra
8. Weeks 12: Jovial Jacob Ukken
Table 1: RACI Chart for Team Roles and Responsibilities
Stephani
e
Weeks
10
Omar
Jovial
Weeks
7-8
Josep
h
Weeks
9
Weeks
11
Weeks
12
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
C
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
R
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
R
A
C
R
C
C
C
C
C
C
Task / Deliverable
Sabriha
Alaa
Nathan
Luka
Rolling PM / Systems
Integrator
Schedule &
milestone planning
Partner coordination
(Carbon Cap)
Stakeholder
interviews & ethics
Heating/cooling load
estimation
Peak electrical
demand modeling
Grid/service capacity
assessment
HVAC efficiency &
WHR benchmarking
Cost modeling &
incentives analysis
Feasibility, risk &
disruption analysis
Data management &
version control
Final integration &
reporting
Weeks
1–2
Weeks
3-4
Weeks
5-6
R
C
R
(R = Responsible, A = Accountable, C = Consulted)
3. Problem Framing and Definition
3.1 Defined Project Scope and Building Archetypes
This project focuses on Greater Toronto Area (GTA) building archetypes, reflecting realistic
conditions faced by Carbon Cap Inc.’s clients, including cold-climate heating demands,
constrained urban electrical infrastructure, and tenant-occupied retrofits.
5
The comparative analysis will evaluate two primary archetypes:
1. Multi-Residential Building Archetype
2. Small-to-Medium Commercial Building Archetype
3.2 Societal and Engineering Context
Buildings represent one of the largest sources of global and national greenhouse gas emissions due
to their reliance on fossil-fuel-based heating and cooling systems. Electrification of building
HVAC systems, through technologies such as heat pumps and variable refrigerant flow systems,
is widely recognized as a critical pathway toward achieving Net-Zero emissions targets by 2050.
Real-world implementation is constrained by limited electrical grid capacity, aging building
infrastructure, long permitting timelines, and shortages in skilled trades and retrofit capacity. These
constraints create delays that prevent immediate, full electrification for many building operators.
3.3 Refined Problem Statement
How might we reduce building heating and cooling emissions for owners and operators while
accounting for grid capacity, retrofit feasibility, permitting limitations, cost constraints, and
minimizing disruption during the transition to net-zero?
4. Stakeholders, Ethics, and Equity (Omar)
4.1 Stakeholder Map
Table 2: Stakeholder Map for Building Electrification and Retrofit Decisions
Stakeholder
Primary or
Secondary
Need
Risk/Concern
Building owners or
operators
Primary
Efficient HVAC systems
to save costs
High upfront cost,
stranded assets, retrofit
disruption
Maintenance
Teams
Primary
Easy access to HVAC
systems (easy to fix
systems when they break
down)
System can get complex,
skill gaps, reliability at
peak load capacity
6
Homeowners
impacted by
retrofitting
Primary
Quick and accessible
installation
Timely installation that
could displace people,
destruction of property.
HVAC/electrical
trades
Secondary
Clear system
requirements,
standardized equipment,
and safe installation
conditions
Skill gaps with newer
technologies, safety risks,
inconsistent building
infrastructure
Government boards Secondary
Reduction of greenhouse
gas emissions while
ensuring compliance
with codes and standards
Slow adoption due to cost
barriers, resistance from
stakeholders, policy
enforcement challenges
4.2 Partner Engagement Plan
1. Carbon Cap Inc.: Ongoing consultation on decision-support needs, emissions accounting
assumptions, and operator pain points.
2. External Stakeholders
4.3 Ethical and Equity Risk Scan
Key risks include:
1. Increased rent or cost pass-through to tenants following retrofits
2. Disruption during construction affecting vulnerable occupants
3. Energy insecurity if systems underperform or increase peak costs
4. Disproportionate benefits accruing to owners rather than occupants
5. Research Methods
5.1 Interview Protocol
1. Semi-structured interviews
2. Topics: retrofit decision-making, barriers to electrification, cost concerns, grid constraints,
tenant impacts
Sample Questions:
1. What factors most influence your decision to retrofit HVAC systems?
7
2. What are the main barriers to full electrification in your building?
3. How do tenant disruption and affordability factor into retrofit decisions?
5.2 Consent Script
Hello and thank you for taking the time to speak with us. We are a team of engineering
students from York University working on a course project focused on assisting Carbon Cap Inc.
in upgrading current HVAC systems to electrified models. We would like to invite you to
participate in a short interview to help us gain real-world perspectives for defining constraints and
priorities and making decisions.
This interview is for educational purposes only, and any information you share will be used
strictly in our student project. Any input will not be used for marketing or sales purposes. Names,
organizations, nor any identifying details will be included in any official (or unofficial) documents
unless explicit permission is provided. Any documentation of your response will be anonymized.
If our project meets the needs of Carbon Cap Inc. and they wish to continue exploring our work,
you will be notified and asked for consent if their terms are different to what you originally agreed
to.
The interview will take approximately 15-30 minutes about your personal experience and
connections to the issue. Participation is 100% voluntary, and if you do not wish to answer any
specific questions, you may skip them or request to stop the interview at any time. Let us know if
you have any questions.
Do you consent to participate?
5.3 Recruitment Plan
Participants will be recruited through professional networks, industry contacts, and referrals from
Carbon Cap Inc.
5.4 Benchmarking Plan
1. Electrification technologies: Air-source heat pumps, ground-source heat pumps, VRF
systems, electric boilers
2. Interim efficiency upgrades: Waste heat recovery, advanced controls, boiler efficiency
improvements, heat reclaim systems
8
5.5 Data Management Plan
1. Anonymization of interview data
2. Secure storage on password-protected drives
3. Data retained only for the duration of the course
6. Early Findings
Insight 1: Building operators express strong interest in electrification but cite electrical service
upgrades and permitting delays as major barriers.
Insight 2: Interim efficiency upgrades are viewed as attractive when they deliver measurable
savings without major tenant disruption.
Insight 3: Decision-makers require clear, comparable metrics (cost, emissions, payback,
disruption) rather than single-technology recommendations.
7. User and Systems Analysis
7.1 Operator Decision Journey (Summary)
1. Recognition of aging or inefficient HVAC system
2. Exploration of electrification and efficiency options
3. Assessment of costs, grid constraints, and incentives
4. Stakeholder consultation (tenants, utilities, contractors)
5. Phased decision and implementation
7.2 Systems Map (Description)
The retrofit decision system includes technical subsystems (HVAC, electrical service, controls),
institutional factors (utility capacity, permitting, incentives), social factors (tenant disruption,
equity), and market constraints (supply chain, skilled trades availability).
9
8. Design Direction and Success Metrics
The following table represents an initial set of engineering success metrics:
Table 3: Preliminary Design Criteria and Measurable Success Metrics
Category
Success Metric
Measure / Logic
Safety
Electrical system safety
No overloads, breaker trips, or safety
incidents after upgrades
Usability /
Accessibility
Disruption to occupants
Heating and cooling remain available,
and work is completed within a
scheduled window
Technical
performance
Emissions reduction, shift
to electric heating and
cooling
Building produces measurably less
carbon compared to before by
eliminating the use of fossil fuels
Technical
performance
Energy efficiency
improvement
Building uses less energy to maintain the
same comfort
Societal /
Ethical
Affordability impact
Utility bills stay affordable and do not
place an extra burden on tenants
8.1 Initial Decision Criteria
1. Emissions reduction (CO₂e/year)
2. Energy use reduction (kWh or GJ)
3. Peak electrical demand impact (kW)
4. Capital and operating costs
5. Payback period
6. Retrofit feasibility and timeline
7. Tenant disruption
8. Equity and affordability impacts
10
8.2 Baseline vs. Target Metrics
1. Baseline: Existing fossil-fuel HVAC system performance
2. Target: ≥30% operational emissions reduction within transition period; minimized peak
demand growth; payback ≤10 years for interim measures
11