Silktech EcoAuro (1.0)
and
EcoAuro 2.0 is Illegal
and Non-Compliant
Innova’s Million Dollar Challenge
How Silktech is Cheating
EcoAuro (1.0)
EcoAuro 2.0
Failure to be listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List
In Canada, all air-conditioning and heat-pump systems must be listed in the NRCan database. In fact, it is illegal to import or sell a unit that is not listed. At the time of this publication, March 16, 2026, the Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 are not listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List.
Failure to meet NRCan Minimum Efficiency Requirements
Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) has a published rated capacity of 8,000 BTU in its brochure.
Under federal law, any 8,800 BTU heat pump in this class must meet:
13.4 SEER2 or 9.3 CEER minimum to be legally sold, installed, or used in Canada.
Neither the Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) nor the EcoAuro 2.0 publishes a SEER2 or CEER value in their documentation because the unit cannot meet the required 13.4 SEER2 or CEER when tested in a certified lab.
Illegal Rating
Silktech uses the wrong rating metric in their published documentation, EER instead of SEER2 or CEER, COP2 instead of HSPF2.
Silktech publishes only an EER for cooling and a COP for heating.
Neither EER nor COP is a legal rating for this product category. For a heat pump, federal law requires:
- SEER2 and HSPF2
- Or CEER
This alone renders the units illegal.
Illegal Misclassification
By using an EER instead of SEER2, Silktech is classifying EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 as PTHP, but EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 do not meet the PTHP definition under Energy Efficiency Regulations:
A lawful PTHP must have:
- A wall sleeve
- A separate unencased chassis
- Through-the-wall mounting
The Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 units lack these traits.
Misclassifying the EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 as PTHP by using EER is a direct violation of NRCan rules and is illegal.
Miscalculated Performance Numbers
Silktech misrepresents even the fabricated numbers it publishes for Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0 in both heating and cooling.
In Cooling
For the EcoAuro (1.0) model:
- Cooling Capacity: 8,000 BTU
- Power Input: 750 W
-
Using their own watt input:
8,000 ÷ 750 = EER 10.67
Yet, Silktech publishes 10.91 EER.
For the EcoAuro 2.0 model:
- Cooling Capacity: 12,030 BTU
- Power Input: 1,100 W
-
Using their own watt input:
12,030 ÷ 1,100 = EER 10.94
Yet, Silktech publishes 11.6 EER.
Fraudulently lists the cooling capacity as 8,000 BTU with an EER of 10.91. When calculating the numbers, the EER of 10.67 is illegal. Can’t these cheaters do simple math??!!
In Heating
For the EcoAuro (1.0) model
- Heating Capacity: 8,000 BTU
- Power Input: 700 W
-
Using their own watt input:
8,000 ÷ 3.412 (BTU to W) ÷ 700 = 3.35 COP
Yet, Silktech fraudulently publishes 3.4 COP.
For the EcoAuro 2.0 model
- Heating Capacity: 11,970 BTU
- Power Input: 1,010 W
-
Using their own watt input:
11,970 ÷ 3.412 (BTU to W) ÷ 1,010 = 3.47 COP
Yet, Siktech fraudulently publishes 3.66 COP.
None of the numbers they publish is consistent with their own data.
Fraudulent and Fake Numbers
Somehow, this claimed 8,000 BTU of cooling increases to 8,831 BTU when Silktech fraudulently publishes the data on the MAEDBS website. In heating, Silktech pulls the same fraud, increasing the capacity from 8,000 to 8,800 BTU. Both numbers are fabricated.
Here’s where it gets interesting. The manufacturer, Zymbo (China), lists very different numbers than Silktech’s brochure for the same unit.
Zymbo claims the same unit, called Clima Puro, has a higher capacity of 8,831 BTU and a different efficiency of 10.6 EER. What’s even more fascinating is that Zymbo’s own internal calculations are inconsistent.
Here’s what Zymbo publishes:
- Cooling Capacity: 8,831 BTU
- Power Input: 750 W
Using their own watt input:
- 8,831 ÷ 750 = EER 11.77
Yet Zymbo, the manufacturer, publishes an EER of 10.6.
- Heating Capacity: 8,800 BTU
- Power Input: 700 W
Using their own watt input:
- 8,800 ÷ 3.412 (BTU to W) ÷ 700 = 3.68 COP
Yet, Zymbo, the manufacturer, publishes 3.35 COP.
Zymbo is manipulating the numbers. The numbers they initially published were too good to be true, so they simply “dumbed down” the efficiency and presented lower efficiency values.
When Silktech published its own figures, it used the real (but still fake) numbers that Zymbo publishes when uploading data to the MAEDBS website, then set the minimum SEER2 to 13.4 to make the data appear compliant.
For the EcoAuro2.0, the claimed 12,030 BTU capacity and 11.6 EER rating are false. When tested in a lab, this unit will not produce 12,030 BTU and an EER of 11.6. So, even ignoring the misclassifications and incorrect ratings, the actual numbers they claim are fake and inconsistent with expected test results.
Summary of Violations
Siktech EcoAuro (1.0) and/or EcoAuro 2.0:
- Failure to list on the NRCan database
- Publishes fabricated numbers in cooling
- Publishes fabricated numbers in heating
- Uses illegal rating metrics EER instead of SEER2 or CEER
- Violates NRCan product classification rules
- Violates NRCan labeling requirements
- Fails SEER2 or CEER minimums because efficiency numbers are falsified
- Contradict basic mathematics in efficiency numbers
- Fails to use the correct testing methods
- Violate the Competition Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-34), which prohibits deceptive efficiency claims
Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) and EcoAuro 2.0: cannot legally be sold, installed, or used in Canada, and we back that statement with a One Million Dollar Guarantee.
Illegal to Distribute, Install, and Use
Silktech EcoAuro (1.0) and/or EcoAuro 2.0 are illegal to distribute, specify, install, or use because they are not listed in the NRCan database and do not meet NRCan heat pump energy-efficiency requirements. To meet the NRCan requirements, the EcoAuro (1.0) would need to have an SEER2 rating of at least 13.4 at 8,831 BTU and an HSPF2 rating of at least 5.4 at 8,800 BTU, or a 9.3 CEER, and the EcoAuro 2.0 would need to have an SEER2 rating of at least 13.4 at 12,030 BTU or a 9.3 CEER and an HSPF2 rating of at least 5.4 at 11,970 BTU. These ratings cannot be made up; they must be tested in a genuine lab.
How Everyone Gets Hurt
Sellers
Private labelers, Manufacturers,
Distributors, Dealers, Resellers
Selling a non-compliant HVAC product is a direct violation of the Energy Efficiency Act and NRCan regulations. Sellers are exposed to:
Federal Civil Penalties
NRCan may prosecute for non-compliance for every unit distributed in commerce. Penalties stack and can reach six-figure outcomes per model.
Product Seizure and Forced Recall
NRCan can seize inventory, block further distribution, and mandate recall or destruction of illegal equipment.
Competition Bureau enforcement… Competition Act Section 52
Publishing fabricated ratings constitutes a deceptive trade practice under the Competition Act. This exposes the seller to federal enforcement, mandatory corrective advertising, and civil penalties.
Breach of Contract and Indemnification Claims
Developers, contractors, and property owners can sue the seller for damages if the installed equipment fails inspection, fails commissioning, or causes code violations.
Class-Action Exposure
Tenants, condominium associations, and homeowners’ groups can sue for misrepresentation, damages, inflation in energy costs, or unsafe equipment.
Loss of Manufacturer and Distributor Licenses
OEM partnerships and distribution channels can be terminated for selling illegal equipment.
Selling these units is both legally and financially dangerous.
Installers
Contractors, HVAC technicians, MEP firms
Installing non-compliant equipment exposes the installer to direct professional and legal risk.
Violation of state and local mechanical codes
Most jurisdictions require installed equipment to be listed, certified, and compliant with NRCan minimums. Installing unlisted units violates the code.
Loss of contractor license
Boards can suspend or revoke licenses for installing non-certified or illegally rated equipment.
Civil liability for damage
If the unit fails, performs below specifications, overdrafts electrical circuits, leaks refrigerant, or causes mold or structural damage, the installer can be sued.
Professional negligence claims
Installing non-certified equipment is a breach of standard practice.
Insurance denial
Work performed with illegal equipment can void contractor liability insurance coverage.
Installers who choose these units are assuming direct legal and financial responsibility.
Loss of Contractor License
Boards can suspend or revoke licenses for installing non-certified or illegally rated equipment.
Civil Liability for Damage
If the unit fails, performs below specifications, overdrafts electrical circuits, leaks refrigerant, or causes mold or structural damage, the installer can be sued.
Professional Negligence Claims
Installing non-certified equipment is a breach of standard practice.
Insurance Denial
Work performed with illegal equipment can void contractor liability insurance coverage.
Installers who choose these units are assuming direct legal and financial responsibility.
Engineers
MEP engineers, Specifiers, Consultants
Engineers face a high risk of exposure if they specify or approve the use of illegal equipment.
Professional malpractice exposure
Specifying equipment that does not meet SEER2 or CEER requirements, or does not appear in AHRI/NRCan Searchable Product Lists with accurate data, is a breach of engineering duty.
Loss of PE license
Stamping drawings with illegal or misclassified equipment creates a direct disciplinary risk.
Design liability
If the equipment fails to meet code, fails load calculations, causes tenant complaints, or drives excessive energy use, the engineer is liable for damages.
Insurance exposure
Errors & Omissions insurers reject claims involving knowingly illegal equipment.
Any engineer who signs off on these units is accepting personal liability.
Building Owners
Developers, Property managers, REITs, Condo associations
Owning a building with illegal HVAC equipment exposes the owner to substantial financial and legal risks.
Code violations and failed inspections
Buildings containing non-certified equipment can fail Local Authority inspections.
Forced removal and replacement
Authorities can mandate the removal of every installed unit, at the owner’s expense.
Insurance cancellation or claim denial
If the equipment is not legal or not NRCan-compliant, insurers may deny coverage or void property insurance policies.
Reduced property value
Buildings with illegal equipment face valuation reductions, impaired financing, and lender objections.
Tenant lawsuits and warranty claims
Tenants can sue for non-performance, high heating/cooling costs.
Fines and enforcement actions
Owners can be fined for every illegal unit installed or operated within the building.
Owning or operating these units exposes the property to material legal and financial damage.
End-Users
Residents, Tenants, Homeowners
Even the resident or end-user is exposed to risk when using non-compliant equipment.
High energy bills and poor performance
Because the published performance data is fake, real-world operating costs are substantially higher than the claimed ratings suggest.
End-users bear financial burdens due to equipment that consumes more power and has limits.
The Million Dollar Challenge
Innova guarantees that the performance numbers published by “Silktech” are fake.
Innova will pay one million CAD to any manufacturer, distributor, engineer, or entity that can produce a certified, independent laboratory test report corroborating the claimed capacity and efficiency when tested in accordance with DOE regulations.