Evidence of meeting #8 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cema.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
What technologies are we looking at to reduce the need for water in situ? Because that's where we're going.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
This is a big question, and there's very little time left, but if you want to, you can take a stab at it.
10:05 a.m.
Manager, Water Management, Department of Natural Resources
The technologies mostly focus on surface mining and on improving water issues there. As far as in situ goes, the improvements with respect to water use are, for example, solvent-assisted steam injection, where you lower the temperature of the steam you need and hence the amount of water. Others are looking at different in situ methods that do not use water, such as toe-to-heel air injection. So they're looking at different methods.
Now, as for the ones that actually do use water, the improvements there would be in improving the water treatment they use to recover more water so they're not disposing of as much water in their deep-well injections, the waste water from the water treatment processes.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you very much, Dr. Kasperski. That was very efficient and very profound, really. You covered a great deal of terrain there.
We now move to the second round of five minute questions.
Mr. Trudeau.
March 5th, 2009 / 10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
I have questions for DFO, but I would like to first go back to something you just said, Mr. Stringer: that the tar sands are becoming increasingly sustainable. How do you, quickly, see that happening?
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
What I meant to say, if I didn't say it, is that the challenge was that input costs were very high and growing very quickly. The sense is that there is some order coming back into it, that the growth is likely to be more sustainable over the next number of years and that we won't see that type of growth in input costs.
If I had been here last year at this time, I would have been talking about then-current estimates of the go-ahead production costs in oil sands in the range of $65 per barrel. They would have needed $65 per barrel for new capital investment. As of last summer, with the growth we had seen less than one year later, it was in the range of $85 to $100. The sense was that this was not sustainable. We are now seeing input costs come down to a more decreased level.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Okay. This is one of the problems with the very word. Your definition of sustainable is in economic terms—in input costs and output costs—and includes no perception of whether this is good for future generations of humans and animals living on the planet.
Could you perhaps address the view of Natural Resources on whether there is a sustainable side, in ecosystem terms, to the oil sands development? Has it been studied?
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
Yes. I would say that we are all speaking to that, generally. I thought the question I received was about the economics of it, and so I was speaking to the economics.
There is no question that sustainable development is a crucial issue and one we are all addressing today. We have spoken to the legislative framework we have and the legislative framework the province has to address those issues. NRCan, like the other departments, takes the view that this must be a sustainable development and is committed to making sure that it is brought on as a sustainable resource for Canada, North America, and the world.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Okay. Let's get away from the mushy stuff of wildlife and little children. Let's talk about energy inputs. How much energy does it take, in percentage, to create right now a barrel of, say, open-mine oil?
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
I can get you, hopefully before the end of the session, exactly what the numbers are, but it is substantial. It is higher than for conventional oil, higher than for natural gas—and significantly higher. In mining it's not as much as it is for the in situ production.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
I'm going there next. I just want to establish a mining view. Do you have it in general?
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
On mining, I may not even have the numbers, because I don't think the numbers are that high. We do have it for in situ.
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
In situ operations—and I am going to ask my guys to correct me if I'm wrong here—use in the range of 6% of Canada's natural gas right now. One of the things we are working on—
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
No, it's 6% of—
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
No, I'm asking how much of the barrel of oil that we're producing to burn as energy.... How much energy did it take to create that barrel of oil?
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
I'll get you a specific number, but it is significant.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Okay. And the follow-up to that is how much water it takes. I know you mentioned four barrels. I've heard figures as high as 11 barrels from various people.
10:10 a.m.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
I'll start, and my colleague will keep going.
The answer, we believe, on the numbers we have—and we are confident with the numbers—is one to four, and it is three to four for the in situ.
Oh, the three to four is for mining? Okay.
But we know that Imperial Oil, for example, is moving to brackish water and saline water and is decreasing their use. We know that others are working on other mechanisms to decrease the use of water.
I have pointed out—and it's in the deck, and Dr. Kasperski can speak to some of this—that we are working in our government labs to try to find ways to decrease the use of that water. It's a hugely important issue.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Do we know what effect injecting solvents and brackish water into groundwater is going to have in the long term? Are there any long-term studies on how aquifers are affected by that?
10:15 a.m.
Manager, Water Management, Department of Natural Resources
That's a critical question. It depends on the hydro-geochemists mapping those aquifers. That's not something that I know. Alberta Geological Survey and Geological Survey of Canada would be better able to speak to that.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you, Mr. Trudeau. Your time is up.
Mr. Calkins, please.