Government Operations Committee on Nov. 6th, 2018

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

My question is for Mr. Xenos. In the briefing we had, we had representations by the various departments responsible for the Government of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. It's clear that the Department of National Defence, by far and away, is the leading producer of emissions. Within that envelope, it's especially the building envelope that produces the emissions.

I recently had the honour of travelling to Canada's Arctic with the foreign affairs committee to study Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic. We were in northern communities and visited a number of DND sites as well as a number of northern communities. Of course, one of the issues up there is power and how to supply power in a reliable way that doesn't produce a lot of emissions.

I'm just wondering, as part of the greening government strategy, if you've already figured out how much of that DND building envelope comes from Northern Watch stations and other defence buildings located up north that are running off diesel generators. Obviously that's going to produce a lot. The challenge of moving to alternative energy sources is also very real because that is the challenge of the north.

Do you have a sense of how much of that DND building envelope is from northern facilities?

[Nick Xenos]

We have looked at DND facilities, because, of course, they are by far the biggest chunk of our emissions. When you look at their bases, heat and electricity are ultimately the two main things.

When you look at the size of the bases, the emissions are predominately from the southern bases. Halifax's naval base is the biggest operational base. I would say, if you take, for example, the two big naval bases, Esquimalt and Halifax, and the major bases in Alberta, Ontario, New Brunswick, etc., and combine them with the emissions factors of the utilities, the grids, and the energy sources in each province, you get a different....

With respect to the northern installations like Alert or the smaller-footprint Fort Eureka, they use a lot of diesel, but their operations aren't that big.

There are different solutions to each of the bases in the sense that at somewhere like Alert or Ellesmere Island, the economics of becoming more energy efficient makes a lot more sense, because the less fuel you need to bring up there, the bigger the savings. Of course, the solution might be different in different places.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Yes, for sure.

In terms of the funding envelopes available for the greening government strategy, are there dedicated funds in the strategy for infrastructure to go above and beyond staffing a coordinating strategy? One of the potential benefits, if we look at northern communities—and even southern communities—where a DND base is powered by utilities that are very carbon intensive.... Are the funding envelopes structured in a way that, by trying to green the government buildings, we could also help reduce the emissions of adjacent communities by providing alternative power sources, or is that way outside the scope of the funding envelopes?

[Nick Xenos]

The funding for the greening has really incorporated.... It's the real property funds, the buildings funds and the fleet management funds, that departments have in their existing budget. It's really about doing things a bit differently. Often when you spend money on energy efficiency, you're going to spend a little bit on capital, but you'll get it back in operating savings. The funds that departments are using are their real property and fleet funds.

There is a lot of opportunity for synergies, I would say, with local communities. For example, the Department of Defence has put out a request for information. It's looking at renewable energy and indigenous possibilities to get a sense of what's out there. DND bases are located very close to communities across the country and, of course, any opportunities there are—

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

To what extent does your mandate include thinking about and incorporating into the strategy a very deliberate attempt to leverage the greening government strategy as much as possible, and to make gains when it comes to greenhouse gas emission reductions in the wider community, whether in the north, south or wherever?

Is that a very intentional part of the strategy?

[Nick Xenos]

Yes. There is an engagement section to the strategy that talks very much about how we can partner with communities, be good neighbours and work on synergies where it's a win-win situation; where we need more clean power and the community is producing clean power. We want departments to take advantage of that. You might want to give an example.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I was going to ask if you have an example of what's going on.

[Kevin Radford]

With the district energy system that I spoke to in our opening remarks, as we modernize the current heating plant infrastructure and all of the tunnels that switch from providing steam heat to Parliament Hill and about 82 different along Wellington..... Part of the contract for the distribution system, when we convert to low-temperature hot water, will allow other organizations outside of the federal government to hook into or put a T in the tunnels and pipes to allow geothermal-type district energy heating to come into various facilities.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I understand that at the moment this infrastructure is already largely in place and that the government is looking at privatizing the management of that.

Is that correct?

[Kevin Radford]

There's an RFP on the street right now to modernize the five heating plants, to get about a 70% reduction overall in GHG emissions and to convert some of those heating plants that are 60- or 70 year-old infrastructure into modern infrastructure going forward.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

What evidence do you have that the privatization of that system will lead to savings for government?

[Kevin Radford]

What evidence do we have?

We're at a point now where we absolutely have to modernize it. We'd be glad to take you on a tour of some of the facilities, the Cliff Street Heating Plant, etc. The evidence is more that the private sector has a lot of experience in Toronto, and other jurisdictions in urban centres where—

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

But the public sector has been running the system for a long time now here in Ottawa.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I think we're going to have to cut it off there, Mr. Blaikie.

We'll now go to Mr. Peterson for seven minutes, please.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Radford, I'm going to give you an opportunity to complete your answer to Mr. McCauley. Time didn't allow that, so please go ahead.

[Kevin Radford]

Thank you both.

Back in mid-2015 or the fall of 2015 when I moved into this role, we didn't have a lot of data and evidence around all of our facilities. We received some program integrity funding in budget 2016 that allowed us to actually study our facilities and do things that I mentioned like Energy Star ratings on those facilities.

The way we used to make investments in our facilities was largely based on health and safety issues, addressing issues where we were outside of code. Some of the targets that my colleague Nick Xenos mentioned are actually allowing us to start looking at greening infrastructure targets as well.

I have a couple of small examples. You'll remember that not long ago LED lights were fairly expensive, etc., but over time they've become easier for us to purchase. Just doing small refits in lighting allows us to accomplish a 6% reduction in overall GHG across the infrastructure. The cost-benefit associated with that is shown in the ROIs, which are about seven years for those various investments, and the savings in electricity.

Another small example would be some of the smart building technology that we've been piloting and installing. I mentioned that we have 66 buildings that are done and we're going to 100 facilities by the end of this year. Our initial pilots allowed us to save about 15% on our energy bills, and the ROI on some of those investments is about five years.

Those are some of the things we are doing. We're tracking and costing, and the methodology is available to the Chair.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you for that.

Madam Gelfand, you talked about the collaboration report. You mentioned that most governments are not on track. I'm a glass-is-half-full kinda guy so I read that as saying that some governments are on track.

Which ones are on track, and what are they doing right? Are there things we can learn from those governments?

[Julie Gelfand]

In terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we found that most governments, except Saskatchewan and the NWT, did have plans to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. That's a good thing.

However, only the federal government and, at the time, Ontario, New Brunswick and NWT, had 2030 targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Eight governments did not have 2030 targets. As you know, the Canadian government's target year in the pan-Canadian framework is 2030, and we found that eight governments didn't even have a 2030 target. There were a few that did but several that didn't. Those are two examples of where governments were and were not prepared.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

That's good. I would like to expand on that.

You and the auditors general audited their jurisdictions on the sustainability of their—

What were you auditing?

[Julie Gelfand]

We developed a set of questions around whether or not that particular government was going to achieve their greenhouse gas reduction targets. Did they have a target, were they going to achieve it, or have they achieved it? Then there were a series of questions on adaptation. Had they looked at the risks? Were they ready to adapt?

Each auditor general in each province and territory asked their governments exactly the same questions as minimal questions, and then each of the auditors general reported to their own parliaments or legislatures. Then all of us pulled together a summary report, which was presented in the Canadian Parliament.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

You said this was the first time all the auditors general had worked together on anything?

[Julie Gelfand]

On anything. Yes.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Do you perceive this being a trend among other—

[Julie Gelfand]

We're tired of corralling.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Is this what auditors general talk about at cocktail parties?