Evidence of meeting #33 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was water.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Good morning gentlemen. I apologize for being late; I may ask questions that you have already heard. On the other hand, I think sometimes it's important to repeat some questions, just to see if we get the same answer.
11:50 a.m.
Some members
Oh, oh!
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
No, I'm just saying that.
Of course, there's an issue in Quebec; there is clearly a problem vis-à-vis our communication or perception, because it's a new issue. What I would suggest, because clearly the way that—and I'm not saying Talisman or any other—the industry tried to sell at the beginning, with Mr. Caillé and all the others, was a disaster, wasn't it?
You don't have to answer that, but it was a disaster. You're blushing; it's a good sign.
My concern is quality of life. I'm sure it's yours too. To ensure it, we need an independent way of monitoring. Of course, it is an issue of provincial jurisdiction, but we have a role to play. This is a serious study that we're doing, and I think we can all be part of the solution.
My concern is the science. We saw in Découverte on Sunday the issue with sodium, the issue of the use of water, the problem you had in Pennsylvania. So of course people are looking through some other examples. B.C. seems to be a model; we have some issues in other places.
How do you manage the issue of science? At the end of the day we can talk about the money, but if we talk about the wealth of people, I think the science and the monitoring process are the most important things. We need also to reassure people, because it's about their lives.
Regarding the possible contamination of water, vis-à-vis the way you use the water and when you bring it back, do you have any scientific study showing that what you're doing right now is great? And to help you, would it be a good thing—through NEB, through some expertise or environmental evaluation—to have in Canada an independent monitoring process whereby we can make a science study, with all the expertise from outside, and then put up a process to reassure everybody?
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Shale Division, North American Operations (NAO), Talisman Energy Inc.
Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of questions there.
First I'll start with the Quebec issue. As you realize, we have been very active in the BAPE process, which is ongoing right now. A lot of the answer to your question is that we very much support a robust regulatory environment. You're right that it's a little immature in Quebec right now; it operates under the mining law. We know that government agencies are working to update those studies so that we can operate at scale.
As far as the studies you asked about are concerned, oil and gas extraction in North America has been in existence for 150 years. The processes we use—specifically, horizontal drilling and fracture stimulation—have been in operation for decades. The first frac job was in 1947. So those studies do exist, and as part of the BAPE process we provided a lot of the data, a lot of the studies you mentioned, to the BAPE commission.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
[Inaudible--Editor]...or independent studies? The issue is toxicity, is it not?
11:50 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Shale Division, North American Operations (NAO), Talisman Energy Inc.
Mr. Chairman, they were not our studies; they were independent, third-party studies. The EPA in the U.S. was the primary author of them. They studied fracture stimulation as early as 1994. In 2004 they put out a study, in 2007 they put out a study, and they're currently undertaking another study whose results will come out in another couple of years.
So those studies exist. Many of the regulatory agencies in other parts of North America, specifically Colorado, have also put out studies, as has the regulatory agency in Pennsylvania.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Fraser, one of the issues will be how to bring back the water in a viable way at the drinkable end. In Pennsylvania, it seems that the state said you need your own infrastructure, that you cannot use municipal infrastructure.
What is your situation? Of course, it's just exploration—you're not exploiting it right now in Quebec—but how do you manage to work with municipalities? Or do you have a provision in your program that you'll have to build your own infrastructure for the water issue?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
This was answered earlier.
Mr. Fraser, could you give us a very short answer, please?
11:55 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Shale Division, North American Operations (NAO), Talisman Energy Inc.
The first answer is that in Pennsylvania we reuse all of our water. We reuse 100% of the water we get back, so that obviously takes that part out of the equation.
The other part of the question I answered was that in Quebec it's very early days; there are only a few wells that have been fracture stimulated. In other parts of North America, where this activity has gone on for longer and it is larger scale, there are known scientific ways to treat this water, such as reverse osmosis, deep injection, and evaporation. The municipal sewage facilities are not used whatsoever.
That would be the long-term solution in Quebec. With only three wells that are fracture stimulated in Quebec this year, it's not at a scale where we can bring those industries in today.
Hopefully in Quebec, if the resource gets developed...and at the end of the day that's for the citizens of Quebec--
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
If a company were to dig a hole about a hundred metres from your house, it's not your issue in Quebec.
11:55 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Shale Division, North American Operations (NAO), Talisman Energy Inc.
No, sir.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Monsieur Coderre, your time is up. Thank you.
We go now to Ms. Gallant for up to three minutes.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Thank you.
The questions I have are more basic. Mr. Heffernan, you provided a very good outline about the process.
But I guess I'm not alone, so you'd better explain it for everyone. You've got your well casing that goes down. The concrete goes between the formation and the casing.
That's correct?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
So the pipe goes down and then goes horizontal. Are there holes at some point that spew out the proppant, or the sand?
11:55 a.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas
Yes, that's correct. We use a process called perforating. A tool is put in the well, and at specific intervals that tool fires small charges that perforate the steel casing and the cement, and it basically gives the fluids, and therefore the proppant, an avenue into the shale formation.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
What about these glass beads? Do they come out of the same holes?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Okay. How do you get the gas out? Is it just dynamics?
11:55 a.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas
It flows. Essentially it seeks a lower pressure environment than the shale, and that lower pressure environment is the surface. The fracturing process creates a pathway from the shale into the well, and the well creates the pathway from the shale to surface. It basically flows because there's a pressure difference between the surface and the reservoir in the shale.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Is it hot water that's going through there or just--
11:55 a.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas
No. It's just...let's call it normal water, which in the summertime would be a little warmer than in the fall. In some parts of Canada where fracturing operations are done in the wintertime, which is generally not the preference, the water supply needs to be heated.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
And that would create more pressure underneath to get the gas out.
11:55 a.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas
No, I don't think so.
Jim may have a better answer, but I don't think so. I don't think the temperature of the water makes any difference. It's just so that it doesn't freeze into a block in a tank or a bit someplace.