Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 19th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Percival, go ahead.

[John Percival]

That's correct. It takes, in some cases, years to generate a final product, and some of those are starting to emerge now after a couple of years of field work. We're expecting a wave of new releases in the near future, so during the final 18 months of the GEM program we'll be producing all of those final reports and maps. So I expect a wave of new information coming out shortly.

[Dr. Brian Gray]

In this we also have presentations that we've made. Often they'll give a presentation at a conference before the final release of the data, so here's the information we're gathering, our inference, hypotheses, etc.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

I don't have much time left and I have another couple of questions.

Are there other locations where NRC is using seismic testing in the Arctic? There was much controversy in 2010 over the government's plan for seismic testing in Lancaster Sound. Communities were worried, not only about the effects of seismic blasting on marine life, but also there was the perception that the government was mapping oil and gas deposits within an area that was supposed to become a marine conservation area.

In 2010, Minister Baird announced that all the testing had been cancelled. Can you tell me if there are any current plans for new tests? If there are, what measures have been taken to protect the marine life and what consultations have been conducted with communities?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

The only seismic work that was being conducted this summer in the Arctic that had anything to do with the federal system, whether it's our group or any other federal department, was the UNCLOS program, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Louis S. St-Laurent, the icebreaker, was up mapping the final bit of the northwest part of the Arctic, fairly close to the North Pole. They were doing that in tandem with the United States icebreaker, the Healy. That is the only seismic work that was going on.

The mitigative process that we have in place on the seismic work is out of caution. We shut down the seismic operation if a marine mammal is within one kilometre of the Louis S. St-Laurent. We have three wildlife spotters--these are all northerners--who are part of the seismic work. They are up on the top of the ship looking for wildlife any time there's a seismic operation going on. If they spot any, the operation shuts down until that marine mammal is out of the one-kilometre zone.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Can you tell me how long they would wait for this mammal to leave, or how long does it take?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

I would imagine as long as it takes, if the rules are they have to be a kilometre away. I don't know.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

All right, thank you.

I'll pass the rest of my time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you Mr. Gravelle.

Mr. McGuinty, up to seven minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for coming.

I am going to continue to ask and explore questions I began last meeting to try to understand how the work you are doing here links to Canada's overall responsibilities and commitments on greenhouse gases.

I didn't hear the words, Mr. Gray, in any presentation. In fact, they are not in print. I didn't hear the words “climate change” or “greenhouse gases”. Canadians understand that the magnitude of opportunity in Canada's north and Canada's south is remarkable when it comes to natural resources. We all understand that. We are looking at $2 billion alone for drilling investments in the Beaufort Sea, despite the fact that we haven't got a proper boom system to contain any kind of spill. But that's another issue.

I want to get as much insight as I can from you and your team. You are doing a lot of fabulous work and mapping. You are basically identifying the magnitude of opportunity and to a certain extent the challenges inherent in exploiting these resources.

I am trying to overcome what is a continuous fiction in Canada, and particularly with this government, that you can dissociate, for example, our responsibilities with greenhouse gas reductions and this massive investment in resource exploitation.

You talked about an advisor group of northerners. You talked about aboriginal communities. In preparation for this meeting, I was just leafing through the circumpolar Inuit declaration on resource development principles in Inuit Nunaat, in which they described climate change under the terms of global environmental security. They go on to talk about it in great detail, which reminded me of the chairman of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff, who, relying on CIA and military research, gave a major speech two years ago in Washington and declared climate change was the number one threat to global security going forward.

I'm trying to get a sense of how your work connects, for example, with the government's promise that in eight and a half years we're going to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by 17% from 2005 levels. That is question number one. Is it connected? What overarching influence does that commitment have on your work and your good investigative research to explore and find all of this opportunity for us? To what extent is it connected? Do you have a connection? We have no national energy strategy in the country, despite the calls over and over by CAPP and other oil and gas producers, for one. It puts you in a tough spot, but how are you linking this in your good work? Or are you?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

I don't think I am the appropriate ADM to be responding to your question on the 17% or how this links to the overall government's response to the 17% target. I can tell you that within our department we are developing plans to ensure, as best we can, that our energy use within our buildings and laboratories, as well as our travel, meet the government's objective of 17%.

I can tell you about the climate change impacts and adaptation group we have within my sector that is working with provinces to make Canadians aware of a changing climate so that they may develop and use adaptive tools and so that we can actually adapt to a changing climate to save lives and money.

We also have a climate change geoscience program that is actually working in the north looking at the effects of a changing climate on infrastructure. Whether it's hard infrastructure for development, housing, or roads, these are the experts who are looking at how a changing climate.... As you know, this is an area that is changing faster than any part of the country. They are looking at how this is affecting permafrost, ocean activity, shorelines, and future development.

That information is very useful for providing northerners with information and tools so they can build infrastructure and their future and understand how to adapt to a change in climate.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Gray, who might we turn to, then? At the last committee meeting we had some really fabulous folks who were involved in a new department that was set up to overcome departmental barriers and regulatory hurdles, in order to facilitate the closing of deals in Canada's north. It is a noble aspiration. I asked the same question, and they said they don't deal with the climate change plan; they don't raise it, necessarily, with folks who come in and ask for help navigating the regulatory hurdles of the federal government.

In your work in geoscience mapping...you touched tangentially on another initiative, which is looking at the effects of climate change, which is not part of--

[Dr. Brian Gray]

It's not part of this, but it's part of—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Help us understand as a committee where we turn in terms of government responsibility for the overarching...how these things all connect, the knee bone connecting to the thigh bone, under the auspices of this larger commitment and promise. Where do we turn?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

I'm just the humble ADM of their science sector.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Would it be the PCO, the Prime Minister's office, or do you think it would be...?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

I can't give you an informed response on that. I don't know.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Environment Canada.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

My colleague says Environment Canada, and that's where he's so badly mistaken. In so many jurisdictions now we're seeing that G-20 countries are merging energy and environmental portfolios. They understand that 86% of all greenhouse gases created in this country come from digging up fossil fuels, transforming them, and consuming them.

I'm going to continue to probe and ask tough questions about how this all connects. We massively invest in the north, which has tremendous opportunity for Canadians in terms of jobs and wealth, but we're pretending that the greenhouse gas challenge doesn't exist.

I'm trying to connect all of these pieces, and, Mr. Gray, I'm not putting you on the spot. You and I have a long working relationship going way back. I'm just trying to see how this comes together.

How is my time, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Your time is up, Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We'll go to the five-minute round, starting with Mr. Lizon.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Good afternoon.

I would like to thank the witnesses for coming to the committee this afternoon.

The first question I have is about methodology. What methods are you using in this program in geomapping, mainly?

[John Percival]

We use a variety of methods.

Probably the largest activity on a cost basis is airborne geophysics. It's a process whereby an aircraft flies and collects measurements from the air. It provides a seamless image of the bedrock below the surface of the ground. We use that to plan our fieldwork, which involves people going in teams out to field areas, setting up a camp, and walking on the ground collecting measurements and observations on the ground, and building a geological map.

That information is supported by laboratory work, which includes analyses that we contract out to private labs--the routine work. Then we do the more cutting-edge research at the Geological Survey of Canada labs when we need answers to very specific questions. For example, it's quite technically challenging to determine the age of rock. They're an important part of the interpretation of the map.

We also analyze surficial materials that the glaciers have left behind for clues to hidden sources of mineralization. Deposits are often covered by sand and gravel till that the glacier has left behind, and we get clues as to where those deposits are through looking at the glacial materials.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

You're talking about the lab work. You have to bring samples to the lab, of course, so how do you acquire them? Do you do any core drilling to support your other methods?