Evidence of meeting #36 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was practices.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Policy Development and Analysis Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Unfortunately, I'd have to follow up on that. It is part of the existing Canadian agricultural partnership, so there's both funding that is cost-shared with the provinces and territories, as well as specific programs that are—
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Maybe, then, you can submit that in writing so that I don't lose more time.
Thank you.
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Policy Development and Analysis Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Certainly.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Biomass was mentioned earlier as a particular option, as an alternative, to fossil fuels for grain drying and possibly for barn heating and other sources. I'm going to need some help here. By the time we gather biomass—at times, we might have to dry it—by the time we store it and then when we burn it and re-release the greenhouse gases, what is the promise in this technology for—particularly with regard to greenhouse gas emissions—replacing specifically natural gas and propane for grain drying?
Mr. Valicenti, I think you spoke about biomass and the research there.
4:15 p.m.
Director General, Innovation Programs Directorate, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Unfortunately, I'm not an expert on biomass, but can I say that it's one of the elements that we're looking at. There are Canadian companies that are fully engaged in using biomass as a clean fuel—if we're thinking of wood pellets and of oat pellets—for grain drying. I'm not an expert on the technology behind it, but it is one of the promising areas of focus in the context of grain drying vis-à-vis the traditional grain dryers that we see on the market currently. As I said, there are Canadian companies that are very, very active in this place and that will be supporting producers on new technologies in grain drying.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Thank you.
I'd like to switch to the Department of the Environment, please, and Mr. Moffet.
Our briefing note from the Library of Parliament talks about the nitrogen and phosphorus balances for agriculture, and it's a fairly good news story with their improvement over time, particularly when we are compared with our fellow OECD members.
You mentioned earlier with respect to our environmental targets that we can't go back. We're not going to get credit for back.... We need to move forward.
Can you put that into perspective, particularly in the case of phosphorus, agriculture is phosphorous loading compared to...? We hear about municipal sewage discharges. Are those also improving?
What is agriculture's share of this problem that we need to focus on and improve compared with other areas?
4:15 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
The short answer is twofold.
First, I'll have to get back to you with the precise data; we do have that data.
Second, the data will show that the relative contribution, of course, varies from area to area and ecosystem to ecosystem. We have some ecosystems that continue to be significantly impacted by agriculture, whereas in others it's primarily an industrial and municipal effluent issue.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. Moffet.
Thank you, Mr. Epp.
Now we go to Mr. Blois for five minutes.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses.
Mr. Moffet, I'll start with you.
Around offset protocols, you certainly teased this out in some of your earlier answers. We're trying to reward behaviour that was not necessarily already being undertaken, to be able to continue to reduce emissions.
Do you have a sense, as they relate to the offset protocols for soil, from what year we are going to start calculating? What baseline are we working from when rewarding those who are using different techniques?
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
I think we're looking at activities. We will not be giving credits for anything that occurred before 2018. That's in terms of the activity.
As for defining what constitutes beyond business as usual, that is something that will vary depending on the activity.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
I appreciate that—that's helpful.
So there's not necessarily going to be one benchmark if we're talking about no-till agriculture. For example, business as usual would be a certain threshold, like once an industry hits this, it would be deemed business as usual.
Is that my understanding?
June 1st, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
That's exactly right.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Has there been any...? I apologize, because there's a lot going on in the federal government. As a member of Parliament, I haven't got into the depths of the Canada Gazette. Relating to offset protocols for soil, have we set what that benchmark is, or is that still to be determined?
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
That's still to be determined on a protocol-by-protocol basis.
We have draft regulations that set the basic rules for developing the protocols and then using the credits. We're now in the process of developing those protocols, and, as I said, one of the first four that we're working on involves organic soil, carbons.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
As I understand it, there's not something set that says that, once an industry hits x percentage in using these certain types of procedures, or it hits business as usual, that's not been publicized yet; it's an ongoing conversation.
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
That's correct.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Okay. Thank you.
This might be out of your realm of expertise, Mr. Moffet, but I'll ask it anyways.
Again, I think there are a lot of opportunities here. My colleagues have talked about the things that are going on in agriculture. We're certainly talking about things that we can do to continue to advance work with industry. We've pointed to investments in the budget that are going to help that.
Are there conversations being held at the ministerial level, or certainly within department to department and internationally, about ways that we can try to get to a standard price on pollution or these mechanisms? Obviously, if Canada adopts a certain approach, but other jurisdictions are choosing not to ask their domestic producers to be part of climate solutions, it could create an imbalance in trade. Are those conversations being held, or is that outside the scope of what you work on in the department?
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
This is directly within the scope of what we work on, because, of course, this is a challenge for Canada and other countries that are taking action to reduce greenhouse gases. We need to do so in a way that both reduces emissions and that doesn't adversely impact our economic activity, and that certainly doesn't simply lead to transferring that activity to another jurisdiction with less stringent standards.
There are a number of ways to do that. One is in the way we design pricing. I can get into that.
4:20 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
We are looking at it. That's the short answer.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
I don't mean to interrupt you. I have only so much time for questions, and this could be a long one.
I would be interested in knowing, to the extent that you could share with the committee, some of the work that's going on to try to find that harmonization. I would be interested in knowing that, if possible, speaking as a member of Parliament. I'll leave that with you.
I have about 55 seconds left in my time, so I'll go quickly to you, Mr. Valicenti. As it relates to the clean fuel standard, these are opportunities that exist for our sector. You talked about wood pellets, for example. As it relates to using wood pellets for grain drying, is it the idea that it would be an end-use fuel switch or that we'd be using wood pellets to blend in with the types of fuels that are already being used?
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Innovation Programs Directorate, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
It's to use that as a fuel for the grain drying, as part of the new biomass technology. Again, there are different elements, different types, but that's the intent.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
In my last 10 seconds—perhaps the chair will permit me this—as I understand it, then, this would be an end-use fuel switch on a stationary application to try to help support reduced emissions but still have the activity continue.
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Innovation Programs Directorate, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
That's correct.