Environment Committee on Oct. 4th, 2022

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If could, I'll begin with Ms. Giglio.

Your company is doing some truly innovative work in utilizing circular economy principles to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and produce better products. Would you please discuss how putting a price on greenhouse gas emissions is essential for clean technologies to be able to compete on a clear playing field?

[Natalie Giglio]

For our company specifically, we're looking at making our technology economically available without the need for a price on greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon credits and pricing schemes are an additional benefit to our technology specifically, but that's unique to our business model.

For the rest of our industry and for the rest of the technology that we need to bring to market, it's extremely important. That factor itself is going to be what drives our partners—the big cement companies, the big heavy emitters—to invest in companies like ours faster, if they have this price chasing them down to invest and to bring infrastructure online to decarbonize their systems.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

Mr. Kingston, I'll now move to you, if I could.

In what ways could Canada's current regulatory and policy framework facilitate or hinder the realization of the country's potential in the battery supply chain?

[Brian Kingston]

Sure. Thank you.

The most important thing for the Canadian economy and the auto supply chain is our integration with the United States. That's really what's underpinned so many of the investments that have been made here. Over 90% of the vehicles that we build end up in the United States, so ensuring that we continue to align our regulations with the U.S., from a manufacturing perspective and from a safety perspective, is key.

One big element of this is the fact that we have aligned tailpipe regulations—aligned with the EPA. That's been pivotal to increasing the efficiency of vehicles and encouraging this integrated market.

I would say that that should be our biggest priority: to keep an eye on the U.S. and keep aligned.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

On the same thread, what changes would you make to federal policies and support programs to ensure that Canada realizes its EV battery supply chain potential?

[Brian Kingston]

First and foremost is a response to the Inflation Reduction Act.

We need to move quickly and understand those competitive gaps. We don't have the fiscal firepower to match the U.S. $30-billion tax credit, but we do have some unique advantages in the supply chain—critical minerals being a great example. Where we do have those competitive advantages, we have to match what the U.S. is providing companies to make sure that investment still flows to Canada.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

Continuing on, are there lessons from Canada's successes to date in the EV battery sector that can be applied to other tech sectors? If so, could you discuss that?

[Brian Kingston]

Yes. I think the big lesson, particularly over the last two years in the success that Canada has had in attracting some investment into EV manufacturing, is that a lot of it is because of programs like the strategic innovation fund and the net-zero accelerator that was attached to that. Companies took note when the government announced major incentive programs that were dedicated to zero-emission or net-zero technologies.

I think more of that—and applied to other sectors—is really important. Companies are looking to invest right now, and if governments are out explaining the programs they have on offer, it does get attention.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

I want to go back to a point that came forward last week with another witness. It aligned with the realities of how quickly the technology is expanding and shifting with the investment in infrastructure.

Could you speak to that in terms of projecting five or 10 years down the road, when we know the technologies around EVs are shifting so rapidly?

[Brian Kingston]

I'm sorry. Do you mean in terms of charging infrastructure?

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Yes.

[Brian Kingston]

There's no doubt that the technology is shifting rapidly.

In total, right now, global automakers are investing about $550 billion U.S. into this technology through 2030. This is why one of the big asks that we've had of government recently is to engage more with automakers on charging infrastructure because we're bringing new vehicles into the market with new technologies at a very rapid pace, and some have much larger batteries that require different paces and speeds of charging.

There's a lot happening, and it does make it difficult to forecast out what the technology will look like and how much of it we need. What we do know is that more and more EVs are coming to market, and Canadians are going to need more infrastructure to make that accessible for them.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

I'll move to Dr. McPherson.

In one of our meetings last week, other witnesses commented on the funding programs needed to support clean technologies and recommended that they be better harmonized to allow for faster deployment of clean tech. Do you agree with that? I would really appreciate your comments on that.

[Dr. Madeleine McPherson]

Yes, definitely.

The deployment, especially of renewables right now, but also of transmission infrastructure and EV charging and basically the technologies that we have on deck now.... Getting those in the ground is hugely important and a huge challenge. We have only 13 years between now and 2035. There's obviously a lot of research and development that can go into improving technologies, but at this moment in time, I think deployment—and policies and funding for accelerated deployment—needs to be a top priority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Sorry, we'll have to move on.

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We'll go to Madame Pauzé for six minutes.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to digress for a moment on the issue of the problems we're experiencing, with headsets in particular. I know we'll be discussing the possibility of Parliament sitting in hybrid format in perpetuity. I'd like people to really think about it. Because of these problems, the witness we'd suggested, Mr. Létourneau, will be appearing at the following meeting. As a result, I'll have half as much time to ask him questions. That's all I wanted to say. Now, back to the issue of renewable resources.

Ms. Giglio, at the end of your presentation, you spoke of the need for a solid framework around the CCUS expense tax credit for companies such as yours. You added that you'd submitted your recommendations to better support a more holistic CCUS ecosystem.

I can recall hearing about carbon capture and storage in another context, one in which CO2 is used in a very different way. In this particular context, the idea is to scrape the bottom of deposits that cause global warming.

You seem to proceed differently. In terms of your company's track record of greenhouse gas emissions, are they lower than those that took a different approach, one that doesn't involve capture or storage of carbon?

[Natalie Giglio]

Carbon Upcycling is focused on turning CO2 into value-added products. We don't store CO2 underground or in the oceans. We put it into materials that can be used in transportation networks, in our sidewalks or in the infrastructure in our buildings, wherever concrete is used. That's where our company is focused.

There is room for storage underground, but I think the real change in Canada's ability to be a leader is in helping support technologies that are taking CO2 and turning it into valuable products. That's what we do.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

So you're mainly involved with cement products.

Have you implemented any energy efficiency technologies in your own facilities?

[Natalie Giglio]

Yes. Our technology doesn't use any added heat, water or fossil fuels to produce and capture the CO2. We take it directly from a cement kiln and capture it into that industrial by-product or natural mineral, and then that material permanently holds on to the CO2 and puts it into concrete. We ourselves don't generate any emissions. We capture it into the material.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Have you heard of ECOncrete, which manufactures green concrete without any capture? Do you know if they're using the same technology?

[Natalie Giglio]

I have not heard of ECOncrete, but there are multiple angles in the concrete sector. There are people who make the concrete blocks or Jersey barriers, the precast formed concrete, and then there are folks who make what goes into sidewalks—the wet concrete that comes out of the trucks.

There are technologies to utilize carbon on both sides.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Okay, thank you very much.

You talked a lot about procurement in your presentation. What strategic measures could we recommend the federal government take in its procurement policies?

[Natalie Giglio]

What I would suggest is changing the specification language to be about performance, and not a prescriptive mix where you say you need to have this many kilograms of cement and this many kilograms of aggregate and sand. We want it to be performance-based, to say, “Use whatever ingredients you need to make this strength of concrete.”

That's going to be what allows innovations like ours to be included in procurement and infrastructure that the government funds.