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.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Reg Manhas  Vice-President, Corporate Affairs, Talisman Energy Inc.
James Fraser  Senior Vice-President, Shale Division, North American Operations (NAO), Talisman Energy Inc.
Kevin Heffernan  Vice-President, Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas
Richard Dunn  Vice-President, Canadian Division, Regulatory and Government Relations, Encana Corporation
Marc D'Iorio  Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources
Denis Lavoie  Research Geoscientist, Earth Sciences Sector - Georesources and Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
David Boerner  Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector, Department of Natural Resources

12:20 p.m.

Marc D'Iorio Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The goal of our presentation today is to provide you with a background, as you requested, on shale gas exploration and production in North America. We would like to give you an outline of the geoscience knowledge used to identify oil and gas potential, as well as a preliminary assessment of shale gas resources in Canada.

As you've probably heard abundantly over the last sessions here, shale gas has changed the North American energy market. You can look at the top diagram on page 3 at the NEB reference case as of July 2009, which now starts to include shale gas as part of their forecast and their scenarios going forward, which is new as of 2007--they were not including shale gas in these. As well, perhaps more strikingly, when you look at the North American natural gas supply, you can see that it peaked in 2000, after which the supply from the Gulf of Mexico had started declining, and from 2005 forward, it started moving up again due to the shale gas production in the U.S. In Canada, shale gas production is expected to have the same impact on the gas supply.

Production of shale gas in North America began in the United States some twenty years ago, in the Barnett shale.

Since 1990, nearly 12,000 wells have been drilled, and ultimate recoverable reserves are estimated at 30 tcf, or trillion cubic feet.

The most promising field in the U.S.A. is the Marcellus shale. It is very promising because the organic layer in that shale is very rich. Production there began in 2000, or 10 years ago, and 2000 wells have been drilled, with ultimate recoverable reserves in the Marcellus shale estimated at 49 tcf. To put that into context, North American demand for natural gas is approximately 25 tcf per year.

I'll turn to slide 5, the Canadian context. You've heard of the Horn River. Since 2006, this is the area that's being explored and is going into production. In terms of the potential resource that could be available, the Canadian Society for Unconventional Gas is estimating that approximately 500 tcf might be available from the Horn River Basin. As well, the Utica and Lorraine basins are now being looked at in Quebec and have a potential of 181 tcf. Shale gas potential exists in many other parts of the country as well, not just in these areas shown on the map--in Ontario, for example.

Again, putting these potential resources in context, the Canadian gas demand on a yearly basis as of 2008 was about 2.5 tcf.

Our role is to assess the geological context. The work done by the Geological Survey of Canada and Natural Resources Canada is published and funded by taxpayers. All the work conducted by the Geological Survey of Canada is published in scientific journals or publications produced by Natural Resources Canada.

The data and publications are used by the private sector, in the development of new exploration sites, and by the public sector, by regulatory officials and the provinces that own the resources.

Most shales currently being explored have been mapped or studied by the Geological Survey of Canada, which was founded in 1842.

Shales can be very different in terms of mineralogy. For example, the organic matter that actually determines its potential can vary, but there are also differences in silica and carbonate content that affect our ability to fracture the rock, in the case of natural gas production.

The key elements on this in the work that the Geological Survey does really have to do with the petroleum system and how you generate resources. To have a working petroleum system, you need sedimentary rock and you need several kilometres, typically, of sediment. You need a layer that's going to be very rich in organic material. That's the source rock, and it's typically clay and it becomes shale. So shales are the source rock for petroleum systems most of the time. Then you need to bury the system and expose it to some heat--we call it cooking--and you create petroleum from that. Eventually, you keep cooking it and you produce natural gas. If you keep cooking, well then everything is gone and it dissipates.

Eventually the oil and gas will migrate into a reservoir that is a structural trap. The structural traps are your conventional reservoirs. With the technology now, putting together the ability to fracture and to horizontally drill, you're able to go back to the source rock, which is the shale.

Slide 7 looks at the extent of the preliminary assessment of shale gas resources. The Geological Survey looked at what's available at the surface and also at the rocks, the drilling, and all the data that's available publicly, as well as the seismic records. In the typical cross-section, what you would look for is that source rock, which you see in red in the diagram on the left. That is the shale natural gas, and typically there's an impermeable layer on top that has trapped...left the natural gas where it is. These are obtained partly by the seismic profile, but then with analysis of the rocks and geochemical analysis to understand the system, its evolution with time, and then the potential of the rock itself.

In the second diagram--I think it's a diagram that's been shown already today--is your typical type of drilling, where you start vertically and then you go horizontally. Typically, in Canada the areas that are currently producing natural gas or where they're exploring for natural gas out of shales are several kilometres below the surface. Again, the context for groundwater is that groundwater is typically in the first few hundred metres, near the surface.

Slide 8 deals with the roles and responsibilities of the various governments and regulatory agencies. Regulation of onshore oil and gas drilling and production, including shale gas, falls primarily under provincial jurisdiction, as well as of the Yukon Territory. The federal regulatory role is limited to territories onshore and offshore, through the offshore boards, and, in the Northwestern Territories and Nunavut, through the National Energy Board.

The department of Natural Resources Canada, through the Geological Survey of Canada, plays a key role in understanding natural resource potential through its geoscience and geomapping programs.

Slide 9 is the last slide.

In the roles of responsibility of the federal government, other federal departments can be involved in the shale gas development, principally, Environment Canada, through their administration and enforcement of certain provisions of the Species at Risk Act or the Migratory Birds Convention Act; Environment and Health Canada, through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the chemicals management plan; Fisheries and Oceans, under the Fisheries Act, for the protection of fish and fish habitat; and finally, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, through their responsibilities relating to oil and gas and their issuance of rights in the territories but not onshore Yukon.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

12:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Thank you very much.

Just before we go to questions, in the presentations with the earlier panel and in this presentation, you talk about “tight gas”. Could you just explain in one minute to the committee what “tight gas” is. You have conventional, tight, and then this CBM, shale, and frontier.

Monsieur Lavoie.

12:30 p.m.

Denis Lavoie Research Geoscientist, Earth Sciences Sector - Georesources and Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources

Thanks for your question.

“Tight gas” is some kind of a conventional reservoir that is characterized by very low permeability and porosity. So you need to fracture that conventional reservoir, because the reservoir is different from the source.... That's how we distinguish conventional from unconventional. So it's still a conventional reservoir, but with very low permeability, so in order to produce a gas out of it, you need to fracture that conventional reservoir, and it is called “tight gas”.

12:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Thank you, and you did it in a minute.

Perhaps we could go now to questioning, starting with Monsieur Coderre for up to seven minutes.

Go ahead, please.

12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

So from tight gas to tight questions.

Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, Mr. Kennedy, who is our party's environment critic.

Natural Resources Canada is a wonderful umbrella organization, with much expertise, etc. My question concerns the latest budget, which removed environmental assessments from the hands of the National Energy Board. You did not speak about that.

Would it not be possible to also engage in environmental assessments? Obviously, one of the problems with shale gas is that its production requires a lot of water. Many studies have been quoted here and there. Mr. D'Iorio, you yourself are the expert resource person at National Resources Canada. Could your department not consider the fact that, because of the water situation... The water table ends up by reaching the river. There must be a way the department can play a role. I would like for you to explain whether Natural Resources Canada could indeed play such a role.

12:30 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

I do not want to hypothesize on the kinds of roles we could play. What I can say is that the information that is produced is publicly available for both regulatory agencies and the provinces that have responsibility over the resources.

As well, experts from the Geological Survey of Canada contribute their expertise in over 60 environmental assessments a year. So the department already plays a role: we provide scientific information.

12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

Has there been or is there currently an environmental assessment conducted into shale gas exploration in Quebec? Things are now happening in that sector. You see how people are reacting. We on this side get the impression that the minister is saying that everything is okay, that no problems have been identified, but without wanting to place you in a difficult situation, I would like to know whether the public service has already conducted an environmental assessment in Quebec?

12:30 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

To my knowledge, no assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

Is that because you are told not to conduct one or because that is not your role anyway?

12:30 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

The act sets out specific conditions that trigger an environmental assessment. Those conditions have not yet been met.

12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

What are those conditions?

12:30 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

I am not an expert in the matter.

Perhaps David can answer the question.

12:30 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

David does not want to answer. Go ahead.

12:30 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

I'll drag you in, in a second here.

For example, in the Fisheries Act, protecting marine habitats is a condition that could trigger an environmental assessment.

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

Very well. There is also the emission of chemical products, which is a matter for Health Canada. Would such an assessment be conducted by the National Energy Board?

12:35 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

No, not in Quebec.

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

But what about at the federal level?

12:35 p.m.

Director General, Director General's Office, Department of Natural Resources

Marc D'Iorio

No. That falls under the responsibility of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

Very well.

Mr. Kennedy.

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you.

Thank you for your help, colleague.

I have similar questions. We were told earlier that this fracturing—we know the fracturing technology, and actually Canada has done a fair bit with it in oil—has now been in use for some time. What do our government agencies know, and the industries as well, over a period of time, of these new technologies? We're hearing how the new technologies are now making a lot more available. I think the initial reaction of lay people is that these are kind of violent things that happen underneath the ground. Do we really have the studies to tell, over time, what the impact is of the induction of new chemicals and the use of water? If so, where are those studies?

We heard earlier reference to the EPA. First studies were in 1994; that sounds pretty recent. So I'm looking at the experienced studies we have, such as from the Canadian government, because the energy board does have a role in approvals of new projects. I'm not sure where that goes with gas, but certainly it has to do with the oil sands. But on these particular things, do we have the studies conducted? And if so, where can you point us?

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Boerner, go ahead.

12:35 p.m.

Dr. David Boerner Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector, Department of Natural Resources

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We're the scientific arm of Natural Resources Canada, so we restrict ourselves to trying to provide the facts and make sure they're publicly available.

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

That's what we want.

12:35 p.m.

Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Earth Sciences Sector, Department of Natural Resources

Dr. David Boerner

The way to try to answer your question is to talk about some of the geological knowledge we have.

I'll turn to Monsieur Lavoie in a second to talk about how we know that reservoirs are under impermeable layers. The geology has acted to trap highly mobile materials over time. So that's part of the knowledge that we have, that there is a geological understanding of how long fluids and gases have been trapped in the subsurface, and they're trapped quite effectively. So geologically there's a—

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

But if I could, before that's handed over.... It's not an abstract question. It's applied science here. So in other words, when that fracturing takes place, what contribution does that make to the assumptions you can have about the geological formations? If I hear you correctly, you're saying that what you know of the science, the geology would say that the liquids will stay contained even following this. So with the chemicals—the 20% or 40% that are left in the ground and so on—we have good reason to believe they're going to stay there.

But I'm asking if there are specific studies that show this happens, that this actually is confirmed when the fracturing process and the other processes involved in the recovery of shale gas take place. Do those studies exist, first of all, and what do they say?