Evidence of meeting #83 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was projects.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:05 p.m.
Scientific Director, Trottier Energy Institute, Polytechnique Montréal, As an Individual
Thank you for your question.
The answer is no, not right now. First of all, we don't even have a vessel that could carry the hydrogen across the Atlantic. That's a problem. Certain technologies are not yet available. That is why I agree with Mr. Nicholson, who gave his presentation after I did. He said that the real problem was getting the electricity to land and distributing it to the market, conventionally or traditionally, via cables.
6:05 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Cost is another issue.
I see wind energy projects being carried out in my region, Saguenay‑Lac‑Saint‑Jean, in Quebec, by, among others, Rio Tinto, which already has expertise in the field. It has dams and infrastructure, so I think it's far enough along, since it has that infrastructure. In fact, Hydro‑Québec actually uses some of the infrastructure. There are costs associated with building transmission lines, for instance, to carry and distribute wind power.
Have any estimates been done to see what that might cost per kilowatt-hour, for instance?
6:10 p.m.
Scientific Director, Trottier Energy Institute, Polytechnique Montréal, As an Individual
It depends on the distance. Mr. Nicholson may have examined that more closely in his article on the deployment of wind power. Regardless, there's no doubt that the challenge is figuring out how to replace fossil fuels. The fact remains that, if you take into account Hydro‑Québec's infrastructure, the company has more than a thousand kilometres in lines connecting the major production centres to the major centres where the energy is consumed. It is therefore possible to build transmission lines at a reasonable cost. The same goes for the transmission of energy between Churchill Falls and the Montreal market. It is therefore possible.
The availability of offshore wind is really something because it ensures a fairly steady supply, thereby reducing storage requirements to balance out variations in offshore supply.
However, all of that requires a conventional power grid once the offshore power has been generated. To justify these projects in eastern Canada, people are talking a lot about green hydrogen, ammonia and other elements, which lack adequate markets, cost a whole lot and are very uncertain.
I think it would be very tough to carry out projects with a 25‑year horizon without a real economic plan that is sound.
6:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
The federal government's strategy is to grant clean electricity tax credits this year. There will be clean hydrogen tax credits. It's an attempt to attract investors interested in carrying out these types of projects.
Would you say those things are likely to attract investors looking to undertake an offshore wind development project, or is the development of such a project still a good ways off?
6:10 p.m.
Scientific Director, Trottier Energy Institute, Polytechnique Montréal, As an Individual
I think adding offshore and hydrogen production are significant risks. Hydrogen projects need support, partly because we don't know where the sector is headed. We have set extremely ambitious climate targets for ourselves, so we are going to have to try things out and scale industries that could fail but that could also succeed.
As far as I'm concerned, despite the risks and uncertainty, we should move forward—on the understanding that we can't create more uncertainty for a given project if we want to understand what's happening and still make progress on the transition.
6:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Finally, I'd like you to give me a short answer to this next question. We need models in order to conceptualize things properly. I'm hearing about blue hydrogen projects, green hydrogen projects.
As far as you know, do we currently have any modelling for that type of energy in Canada?
6:10 p.m.
Scientific Director, Trottier Energy Institute, Polytechnique Montréal, As an Individual
Yes. Calculations have been done, but the issue is how we incorporate hydrogen at the service level. Production-wise, we have a good idea of the costs, especially at the Trottier Energy Institute, where the Transition Accelerator is at work. A number of organizations are studying the subject.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
I want to thank all the witnesses for the excellent testimony.
In my 20 years in Parliament, I've never seen perfect legislation. This is why witnesses are so important. Your point of views matter so that we can make sure the legislation does what it's supposed to do.
To that, Mr. Vascotto, I'd like to start with you.
My mother is a MacNeil. They came from Cape Breton to work the mines in northern Ontario, but I'll admit that the only fish I ever caught was a six-pack going over to buddy's house after you'd spent all day out on the lake.
6:10 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Fisheries are not my area of expertise, but I know you've said that your colleagues.... You've just been invited to this, but are you able to provide us with language on issues of consultation and of compensation that may be necessary to put into the bill?
My understanding was that these were issues that were dealt with at the offshore petroleum boards, but if there's something that's needed in the federal legislation, would you look at language where you think it would be important and that you could bring to us? You could call my office, and we could work with you on it. That, to me, is how we improve bills. Is that a possibility?
6:15 p.m.
Manager, Nova Scotia Fisheries Alliance for Energy Engagement
Thank you for the question.
To be honest, I've eaten an awful lot of walleye from your riding.
Yes, we can start to look at working on some of that compensation language. There are a lot of models out there. We have models that are related. They say, “Okay, what if we develop a fund in case something happens?” There are opportunities to look at those pieces. I'll commit to doing some work on the side and reaching out to you.
Thank you again.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
We will reach out to you, because it's very important. We don't want to have a new industry come up and affect either the environment or the people who are working.
Mr. Schumann, I'm going to turn to you. I was just in Edmonton. Every time I go to Edmonton, I seem to meet the operating engineers. You guys are everywhere.
We're having a conversation about the importance of Canadian workers and union jobs in this transition. We saw that Joe Biden went to COP26. He said he was going to create a new economy based on good-paying union jobs. We haven't quite heard that language from our Prime Minister. In the last three years, half a trillion dollars of investment have moved through the IRA with tax credits—170,000 jobs. We're still trying to figure things out. We're still talking about it.
What are we missing out on in terms of what you're seeing with your colleagues in the United States and the projects they are getting up and moving ahead with?
6:15 p.m.
Canadian Government Affairs Director, International Union of Operating Engineers
That's a good question.
Rarely do I say that I'm jealous of our neighbours south of us, but, in this case, I am. President Biden has put the metal to the pedal. He has been true to his word, and he's acted. They have acted. I will say that unionized construction work has reaped the benefits. We are busier now than we have been for decades. We're very happy about how they pushed it forward. It's a plan for tax credits and putting action into words.
I think, in Canada, we get bogged down. We take very long to get some things through, and it sometimes seems half-hearted. ITCs are very beneficial. We had conversations with officials. We asked for more. They gave us what they gave us. Part of the thing is this: They don't understand labour. The finance end didn't understand it and was somewhat reluctant. We went to deal with some other officials. They got the need for offshore wind. They got the need for development. They didn't understand that they needed a labour component to make sure that Canadians benefit from the work as well.
I don't know where the disconnect is, but there seems to be a disconnect sometimes. I don't know whether it's our system or what it is, but, yes, there is something missing here. We should look to the U.S., for once, on this. They got it right.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
The ITCs are supposed to give us both a prevailing wage and apprenticeships. I'll admit that it was a heck of a step for the Liberals to even mention apprenticeships. However, we don't want loopholes so that workers are brought in from other jurisdictions to take our jobs.
Are there steps we need to take to make sure that doesn't happen?
6:15 p.m.
Canadian Government Affairs Director, International Union of Operating Engineers
Let me be clear: Corporations and companies will always find loopholes.
In talking about Bill C-49, the government told us that, under the “Principles” component of this bill, industrial benefits should be covered. Principles mean nothing. If you look at the benefits plan, it says companies will give us “first consideration” for supply. Nova Scotians and Newfoundlanders will be given first consideration. First consideration doesn't mean a guarantee.
If you look at the principles.... I'm pretty sure Stellantis was all good on the principles. Foreign workers got in. If you look at the offshore stuff.... Remember, offshore wind has two components: the stuff that's going to be built onshore and the stuff that happens offshore. Offshore is all done by massive ships, which we don't have. They'll come from Europe and other places. They'll come with foreign crews. They'll use loopholes to make sure their workers work. The European trade agreement will allow them to have specialized workers on these ships. They can argue it will be specialized because we've never done this work before.
That's our challenge. We need to figure out ways to close these loopholes, and there might be many.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
We saw how Aberdeen was suffering from the downturn in oil. That port city turned it around with construction jobs, transportation jobs and shipping jobs. They were able to do it.
Are your members set to take this on? Can they say, “We can take on those jobs, we're able to do them and we can put trained workers on to make these projects work”?
6:20 p.m.
Canadian Government Affairs Director, International Union of Operating Engineers
It's a good question.
I think we can do a lot of work. I agree that, at the beginning, there will be some type of co-worker who will have to come from abroad. Can we train our workers to do that work? Yes. We've done it on other projects. If I understood it rightly, the boring machine for the LRT.... We in fact had an agreement. There were a lot of foreign workers on it, but we got trained on it.
I think there are opportunities, though maybe not at the front end. If you look at the agreement in the U.S., that's what it is. It's 25% on the ships and it increases every year to ensure we get that training and build that workforce.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Thank you for that.
Colleagues, we have a few minutes. I will propose that we have one last one-minute round each for all parties, starting with the Conservatives.
Is everybody fine with that, so we can get a few more questions in for this large panel today?
You have one minute each. Everybody seems to be in agreement. Very good.
I will start with the Conservative Party.
Mr. Falk, please go ahead.
February 5th, 2024 / 6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses here. You provided some excellent testimony.
Several of you commented on the fact that you felt this bill had been very rushed, and you indicated you had five days' notice.
Last week, we heard from two ministers at this committee. Both of the ministers indicated that the fishing industry was very important. That they wanted to hear the voices of the fish harvesters was what Minister Wilkinson indicated. Minister O'Regan said that there had been consultations within the fisheries and oceans sectors in the provinces. This was also indicated by the Liberal member, Yvonne Jones. She said she was also aware that broad consultations had taken place with fisheries and oceans, and that she was very supportive of the fishing industry.
Is that how you fishermen feel?
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
6:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
On our consultation to date, I can appreciate that we're not directly involved with this just yet, but these can be located anywhere. There were two calls with DFO. We reached out to the staff at Marine Renewables Canada and had several calls with them to try to find more background information. There was an open house held in Charlottetown by the offshore wind development advisory board. That is it to date on what we received on Prince Edward Island, and we're seeking more avenues.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
Thank you.
My last question is going to be for Mr. Schumann.
In the bill, under proposed section 96.6, which has been added, when we did briefings with officials around the legislation—they were before our committee as well—they indicated that, under this particular clause, there would be an opportunity for you to define how the workforce would transpire and how you could ensure that it's more Canadian-based and that we're not bringing in foreign workers, and so on.
Have you had those discussions with officials, and is it a real opportunity under that clause for you to do something in that area?