Environment Committee on Sept. 27th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We need a brief answer, please.

[Randy Wright]

I think it would be 80% from our fleet. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Eighty per cent is good.

Thanks. The time is up.

Mr. Longfield, you are next.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses. In particular, thanks to Mr. Barrett. It's good to see you again, my friend. We've done a lot of volunteer work in mentoring businesses in the Guelph region. It was a surprise to see you on the panel.

We finally get to you, Steve. I want to explore the KPIs that are involved with climate change. One of them has to do with the species that we're losing at an alarming rate. We've had a good discussion about innovation today. We talk about climate change in terms of weather impacts or climate impacts, but we often ignore the fact that we're losing species. Could you expand on how we can turn that around, in terms of measuring this critical part of our climate agenda?

[Steve Barrett]

Thanks, MP Longfield. I appreciate that. It's a great question.

The reality is that species are being lost at an alarming rate, and the ecosystem consists of many interdependent species. It becomes a very complex dynamic. Our approach is to measure the entire ecosystem by looking at all the species that are there—anything from plants and bacteria to fish and even marine mammals—and really being able to establish a baseline to see how that biodiversity is changing.

For example, some of the work we've done is with the oil and gas companies—ExxonMobil in particular—in looking at site remediation. Toward MP Dreeshen's question earlier, this is what we call “life of field”: What is going on with that industrial enterprise, whether it's the structure of a mine or infrastructure, and how is that affecting the ecology over the life of the field? With our technology, which is an order of magnitude cheaper, faster and easier to use, it becomes an affordable reality.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

I don't think we've ever had a five-minute conversation, and at this time of day usually we're supporting microbreweries as well, but I'd like to try to get us to the.... For this report, we really haven't dived into the measurement of results and the trajectories we're on. Do you see your technology being able to be scaled up fast enough to get us the measurements we need, and what's standing in the way?

[Steve Barrett]

That's a great question.

First of all, we are not a start-up. We are at TR level 9. We are an active commercial enterprise, and we have to thank our early customers, such as ExxonMobil, Shell, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and also the indigenous fisheries in Atlantic Canada, for really proving out our technology, so it is exceedingly scalable.

Actually, the biggest choke point for expanding in Canada is the acquisition of samples. It's about 80% of the cost, if you think about the cost of chartering a ship and sending it out to collect samples, but with our partnering program, we've developed SOPs that allow non-scientists to collect samples—whether that's in Atlantic Canada and the ocean or in Canada's north, by the people who live there, like hunters and trappers.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Time is of the essence right now. In terms of the work you're doing, what can we have for our report on what we need to accelerate? How can the federal government help you?

[Steve Barrett]

We need to accelerate a program that we have under way right now with the Nunavut Fisheries Association. We call it “BlueGene”. BlueGene is a multi-stakeholder program led by the indigenous groups. We provide the technology. We provide the tech transfer.

We need sponsorship that can go directly to those indigenous groups. We are prepared to make our facility indigenous-oriented and embed indigenous scientists and training right inside our facility. We think it's a multi-ministry approach: It's collaboration not just with DFO but with other ministries to make this happen. Once we establish that template that's happening with Nunavut, we can expand that throughout Canada's north and also the west coast.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

I'm a college grad, a mechanical engineering technologist from Red River College. Thank you for the work you're doing with colleges. We need to bring that hands-on into the discussion, but we've run out of time this afternoon, unfortunately.

Thanks to both of you for being here as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Longfield. Thank you for always keeping track of your time. It makes my life so much easier.

That takes us to the end of this panel. It's been really interesting, I must say, to listen to the talk about these radical new technologies.

Yes, Mr. Morgan, go ahead.

[Christopher Morgan]

Can I just ask, in closing, for everyone in this room to please spend some time to watch three documentaries?

In order, the first one is A Life on Our Planet by David Attenborough. The second one is Chasing Ice by James Balog. The third is Breaking Boundaries by David Attenborough. As much as he shows us what we've done, he shows us the opportunity to get out of what we've done. His brother was an actor on Jurassic Park. I think we find ourselves smarter than dinosaurs. I don't know. Right now we're destroying our ability to live on this planet. It took a meteor to knock out the dinosaurs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much. Those are good recommendations.

Again, I thank our panellists.

We will break for a couple of minutes while we bring in the next panel.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I want to welcome everyone again.

We are going to start the second half of the meeting down. With us are four witnesses: Zsombor Burany from BioSphere Recovery Technologies Inc.; André Rochette from Ecosystem; Kathryn Moran from Ocean Networks Canada; and Camille Lambert-Chan from Propulsion Québec.

Each witness will have three minutes for some opening remarks. We'll begin with Mr. Zsombor Burany.

[Zsombor Burany, Chief Executive Officer, BioSphere Recovery Technologies Inc.]

Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

My name is Zsombor Burany, and I'm coming to you as a patriotic Canadian who has had no other choice but to accept very large funding from American and European sources. I'm currently working on a very large carbon removal project and the de-acidification of the oceans. I've exhausted all funding avenues in Canada, whereas foreign investors were very eager to proceed.

BioSphere Recovery Technologies' intention is to remove vast amounts of carbon from the environment through the intentional development of algae blooms in the ocean. This is not an initiative that we are taking lightly. We have a very large research facility planned that will be going through a detailed scientific review of all the processes involved over the next half a decade.

The processes are well understood and tested at scale, but have never been deployed at a commercial level. Our project involves thousands of people, dozens of large development and research vessels, and the co-operation of leading universities from around the world.

Unfortunately, BioSphere Recovery Technologies is no longer a Canadian company. We will still engage as many Canadian participants as possible, but we have effectively lost ownership and control of what would have been a top 50 Canadian business, ranked somewhere between Hydro One and Magna.

Very few carbon projects have the potential to scale and make a significant dent in climate change. Even large numbers of small initiatives barely move the needle. Large projects that typically get funded are preventative in nature, which means they deal with carbon capture at the source, not with removing carbon already in the environment.

Unfortunately, CO2 levels are now so high that preventative solutions only slow global warming but do not reverse it. Overall, we have virtually no impact on climate change. The funds being spent today are literally negated by global feedback loops. In plain language, most of the projects we are planning have no benefit to the globe, even though they may have a temporary positive local impact.

Canada has an economic opportunity to set legislation and practices that would allow Canadians to manage the global carbon economy. This economy is still the Wild West, and soon there will be many active players involved who will and must eventually come into conflict with each other. There are several proven remedies to these problems that we could implement, which would effectively put us in a leadership or control position.

No one oversees carbon recovery on a global scale, and we are perfectly positioned to fill the gap. Canada has all the support infrastructure needed already in place to build a dominant carbon economy, but it is unable to bring it into play. Well-meaning but misguided policies prevent the Infrastructure Bank and other programs from enabling—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I'll have to stop you there, Mr. Burany, but you'll have a chance to share your ideas in answers to questions.

We'll go now to Monsieur André Rochette for three minutes.

[André Rochette, Founder, Ecosystem]

Good afternoon. Thank you for the invitation. I'm pleased to be here in person, in Ottawa. That way, I avoid any microphone or other technical problems.

Ecosystem is a Quebec company with about 200 people who are passionate about reconfiguring and rebuilding energy ecosystems in buildings. We work across Canada and in the United States, which now accounts for over half our revenues.

I started Ecosystem with a strong belief that everything can be more efficient. Real estate and the construction industry are not efficient, mainly for what we believe to be three reasons.

The first is that everything gets built on a cost-plus basis, so we pay good people to become cost and systems maximizers. In that, there is no incentive for creativity and innovation, and if you combine that with the context of mainly low-cost energy in North America, we get what we have.

We believe that the industry needs fewer prescriptive measures and more results-based measures.

We recommend focusing on the “how” and not the “what” to make sure that there is clear accountability in the bidding process, the procurement process and the contracting process, and aligned financial interest. We're only going to get what we want if our partners in the equation get rewarded for it.

I like to give NASA as an example. NASA moved their procurement and contracting process to an outcome-based one 20 years ago, and they've achieved a great cost reduction with that initiative, mainly because they reconnected people with results. Their partners' engineers are now working with a purpose and they are motivated to reach greater goals.

A lot of emphasis is put on technology. It's important, of course, and technology like the one Mr. Wright discussed earlier is certainly needed. However, it's important to know that, in Europe, with the same building technologies, 50% less energy is used in the built environment than in Canada.

Amory Lovins, in the United States, has said for dozens of years that consideration should be given to paying professionals based on the money they're able to save, not the money they spend. That means rethinking our purchasing methods and the alignment of financial interests in everything we do. That's clearly true in the construction and real estate sectors, but also in everything we do. Interests must be better aligned with the desired outcome.

If there's one area of technology in which Canada should be a leader, it's heat pumps. We live in a climate and environment in which electricity is affordable and clean. I read in your report that most of the energy we consume is used for heating. Heat pumps are therefore the best technology for the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Rochette.

I'll now give the floor to Ms. Moran.

[Dr. Kathryn Moran, President and Chief Executive Officer, Ocean Networks Canada]

Thank you very much.

I have the privilege of being the president and CEO of Ocean Networks Canada, an operator of world-leading ocean observatories. I am an ocean engineer and have over 30 years of experience in ocean science and technology.

ONC systems host over 12,000 sensors that monitor the west and east coasts of Canada and the Arctic for many benefits, such as research, societal, etc. Our ONC infrastructure studies all aspects of the ocean, but it is now positioned to advance research in a wide range of technologies for ocean-based carbon dioxide removal, which I'll refer to today as negative emissions technologies, or NETs.

You all know well that for us to sustain human life, rapid and aggressive reductions in atmospheric CO2 are urgently needed, but the top conclusion of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 2019 was that NETs must also be implemented, especially if CO2 emission reduction goals are not reached. Recently, IEA identified the need for widespread NET deployment as early as 2038.

NETs have been under-explored to date. The international consensus that NETs are imperative reinforces the urgency to move forward now so that integrated systems can be deployed globally in the next decade. Because the ocean covers 70% of the earth's surface and has already marshalled its natural processes to remove more than 30% of human-caused GHGs, it holds potential for enhanced uptake of even greater removal of CO2 from the atmosphere. This could potentially total more than five gigatonnes per year if investments are made now for advancing the research needed for these mitigation solutions.

With increases in the price of carbon, these ocean-based carbon dioxide removal technologies have good potential to generate income and advance our blue economy, not only with credit revenue, but also through technology export, as you've heard from the first speaker. The IEA forecasts that the carbon removal market will exceed $1 trillion by mid-century.

ONC infrastructure is ideally positioned to support the wide range of ocean-based carbon dioxide removal research areas that span six different solutions. In addition to ocean water-based NETs, Ocean Networks Canada is leading a project called Solid Carbon, which is a climate mitigation strategy that can provide safe and secure CO2 capture from the atmosphere and sequestration that can be scaled to have significant impact in the time frame needed. It combines six existing technologies and is based on the fact that ocean basalt reacts with carbon dioxide injected into rock pore spaces to form solid carbonate minerals at greatly accelerated rates. Basalt abundance in the ocean creates the potential for substantial storage capacities. Solid Carbon thus has potential to sequester 20-plus gigatonnes per year of CO2, which is up to half of what needs to be removed from the atmosphere.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you. That's very interesting.

Ms. Lambert-Chan, you have three minutes.

[Camille Lambert-Chan, Director, Regulation and Public Policy, Propulsion Québec]

Thank you very much.

My name is Camille Lambert-Chan, and I'm the director of regulation and public policy at Propulsion Québec, the industrial cluster for electric and smart transportation.

Propulsion Québec began operations in 2017. It catalyzes the entire sector around joint projects aimed at positioning Quebec as a global leader in developing and implementing smart and electric transportation, for the benefit of Quebec’s economy and environment.

Starting with 20 founding members, Propulsion Québec now has more than 260 members, from start-ups to large companies across the province, including institutions, research centres and mobility services.

What role can the electrification of transportation play in clean technology? To answer that question, I’d like to share the findings of the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC. It found that electric vehicles powered by electricity with low greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions have great potential to reduce GHG emissions from ground transportation on a life cycle basis.

Technological advances in battery production could facilitate the electrification of heavy goods vehicles and complement the conventional electric rail system.

Again according to the IPCC, electrification, combined with low-carbon energy and the transition to mass transit, can improve health, employment, energy security and equity outcomes.

Transportation accounted for 43% of Quebec’s GHG emissions, so there is great potential to improve our environmental record by transitioning from traditional ground transportation to electric and smart transportation. To do this, we need to reimagine the way urban areas function, by reducing energy use, rethinking our supply and transportation routes, and electrifying the vehicles on our roads.

Quebec has what it takes to carry out this energy transition and stands out thanks to its abundant clean energy produced through hydroelectricity, including energy rates that are among the lowest in the world.

Thanks to the expertise of Quebec manufacturers, we build all types of electric vehicles in Quebec, whether for individual transportation, public transit, freight transportation, recreational transportation, special purpose transportation or rail transportation. In short, we do it all, except cars.

To support the deployment of zero-emission vehicles on our roads, Quebec organizations are working on developing charging facilities, smart infrastructures, smart vehicles and mobility services.

While our ecosystem has seen rapid growth for several years, our companies are facing major labour, supply chain, financing and regulation issues, just to name a few. Propulsion Québec’s role is to address these issues across the electric and smart transportation ecosystem and Quebec’s economic development sector.

Thank you, and I will be pleased to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you Ms. Lambert-Chan.

For us to end at 5:50, I'm going to cut 25% off the time each member has for questions. I've done the calculations. For Ms. Pauzé and Ms. Collins, the reduction will only be 20%.

We'll begin with Mr. Kyle Seeback, who has four and a half minutes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I'm going to try to talk very quickly.

I agree with my colleagues here who have said that technology is the answer to meeting any of the net-zero targets globally. The IEA has put out a special report. They said that “35% of the cumulative CO2 emissions reductions [needed to shift to a sustainable path] come from technologies that are currently at the prototype or demonstration phase”. A further 40% of the reductions “rely on technologies that have not yet been commercially deployed” on a mass-market scale.

All of you are in this space of technology. Why are we not succeeding in the technology here in Canada? What's wrong with the investor environment? It's not always about government spending.

I was hoping that Mr. Burany could answer, then Mr. Rochette and then Madame Moran.

[Zsombor Burany]

Thank you very much for the question.

Look, I'll give you an example. I built a telecommunications company here. It was the fastest Internet in Canada and a $250-million investment. I couldn't get anything out of Canada. The Americans invested. They bought it, and they own it now. Where did they get the money? It came from the Canada pension plan. The funny thing is that we're happy to invest our currency into foreign markets, which then reinvest in Canada.

We don't have policies here that would push the funds to the people who need them. The Infrastructure Bank doesn't support small initiatives. It's very difficult to get funding from them—even we couldn't get funding from them. They're geared towards large corporations, so we have the ability to get funds, but our institutions aren't pointing them at us. They're pointing them abroad, so the small corporations that are trying to grow can't access them.

[André Rochette]

I would say a few things.

The first one is that I don't think we have enough outcome-based.... I heard Randy say today that something is prescriptive—we're subsidizing cars but not airplanes. This is not outcome-based; this is a recommendation to look at one thing. I think we should tell the market, “This is the goal. This is what we need to accomplish”, and become more outcome-based.

The second thing is that technology is great, but efficiency is better. The more efficiency we have, the smaller the problem becomes. By the time we have all the technologies we need, if the problem is smaller to solve, it makes it easier.