Evidence of meeting #6 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was battery.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:40 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
The technology is going in a good direction. The cost is coming down. The lifetimes are becoming longer. The safety is becoming better. Everything is becoming better over time.
I really don't know how to answer your question, except to tell you that things are getting better all the time.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
With all these positive signs, what inputs from lithium processing and mining does Canadian industry need to advance to the next stage, particularly related to support from the government? Do you have any specific recommendations to the committee?
1:40 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
I'm not sure I'm the right person to be answering that question. There are probably others in the mining sector who would be better. All I know is that lithium in the ground and highly pure lithium carbonate or lithium hydroxide are not the same. To go from one to the other requires a huge investment and a lot of know-how. It's that missing step that I'm not 100% sure we have in Canada.
For example, Nemaska Lithium has partnered with Livent, which is a big U.S. lithium producer. I think that's probably a good thing, in terms of getting the lithium out of the ground and into value-added materials as expeditiously as possible.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
You mentioned there are very few manufacturers in Canada currently to support the growth of future EV battery manufacturing. Give us a sense of how wide the gap is between what we have right now and where we want to go to achieve a carbon-neutral economy by 2050, as we propose to do.
1:40 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
Well, the gap is enormous. The governments have very nicely realized the importance of electric vehicles in eliminating tailpipe emissions. At the same time, we have to be able to get more renewables onto the energy grid, solar and wind, and for that we need energy storage, be it by batteries or other means. That whole part has been basically ignored so far at the same level of interest compared to electric vehicles. I think the number of batteries that are going to be required for energy storage will be equal to or greater than the number required for electric vehicles. This is a place that...government needs to think about.
How do we get rid of burning coal in Atlantic Canada? How do we get rid of burning oil to heat our homes and so forth? There's a huge challenge going forward.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
The reason I'm asking all these questions is that we now realize that there is quite a bit of a gap between the raw material—the critical minerals we're studying right now—and the product the industry or the market is requiring or demanding right now in Canada. Is it not true that we need to develop this industry and the market first, so we can use these critical minerals in Canada? Is it true that we need to focus on developing that industry first, before we do more to look at the critical minerals situation?
1:45 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
No, I don't think that's right. The market is there at the moment.
In my role with Novonix, we're developing energy storage products for residential homes. To try to get lithium-ion batteries for those products from tier one manufacturers is virtually impossible. You go to them and they say they're sold out until 2024. You say, “Well, you're expanding your gigafactories left and right”, and they say the output from those is sold out until 2024 or 2025.
There's such a demand for lithium-ion cells. It's incredible. If you build a factory in Quebec or wherever, the output will be snapped up.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Thank you.
My next question goes to Mr. Walker.
It was very interesting to hear about what you do in northern Ontario, and I have read about the ethical and environmental concerns surrounding the critical mineral mines around the globe. What engagements and partnerships have you undertaken with indigenous communities in northern Ontario? Do you think that Canada can be a leader in mining ethical sources of critical minerals?
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
1:45 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Frontier Lithium
At Frontier Lithium, we have taken very active and early steps to engage indigenous communities in proximity to this world-class jurisdiction that we're operating in. We've developed exploration agreements for early to advanced stage exploration, which really form the basis of the foundation for future agreements to cover production scenarios. It's a process. It takes time and building trust. We have very good relationships.
The second part of your question talks about building a brand. In simple terms—I know there's not much time—we think about the circle of life. It correlates very well to the concept of recycling and reuse, which really forms the basis of the purpose of energy storage. Based on that—
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Mr. Walker, I hate to have to cut you off again. You have my apologies for that. Hopefully, you'll have time in the next round of questioning.
I now give the floor to Mr. Lemire for six minutes.
1:45 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to all the witnesses for their presentations.
I sincerely feel this is one of the most instructive meetings we've had in this committee. The content we've heard in the last half hour should really be broadcast in prime time. It's very much in the interest of all Quebeckers and Canadians.
My questions are for Ms. Houde, from Propulsion Québec.
I'd like to know a little more about the strategy. Could you possibly give us some details on the subject? I'd especially like to know what your expectations are for this Canadian strategy and the federal government's role in it, particularly regarding the dynamics of federal-provincial relations involving the provinces and Quebec. Do does any of this scare you?
We know the context is favourable. Would you please give us the parameters for the right moment to seize this opportunity?
1:45 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Propulsion Québec
Thank you very much for your question.
As the other speakers noted, we're in a race that has begun around the world. The demand for electric vehicles is absolutely extraordinary, which means that all suppliers in the supply chain will be inundated with orders. If our corporations have to do business with Asian suppliers, for example, and we find ourselves having to manage a long list of orders, we may face shortages and a lack of access to that economic growth or be unable to benefit fully from it.
Other nations are getting organized for this historic economic transition, which will require planning and coordination. I think that's precisely what the federal government should be addressing by developing an industrial policy in all sectors, research and development in particular. We have to determine the areas where we have a chance of winning and focus our efforts there.
Prof. Dahn cited specific examples of businesses that are treated as though they aren't part of a strategic sector. However, that sector has to be treated as a highly strategic sector. We have to act quickly to assist those of our businesses that are working in research and development. That sector isn't technologically mature; it's still developing.
We absolutely must continue to be the best in research and development. We have to develop world-class talent. These businesses will need employees, but training programs aren't yet widely available to them in universities across Canada. We also have to strengthen our supply chain and secure its verticality.
We're facing a lot of challenges. A colossal national undertaking lies ahead, and we have to attack it. That requires coordination, and that's what I expect from the federal government. What I fear is that we won't be quick enough and that we're missing our opportunity.
The beautiful thing is that all of Canada could benefit from this. Every province could benefit from it in a way that complements every other. This is a rare opportunity for the federal government to have a decisive impact on many provinces at the same time.
1:50 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
If my understanding is correct, it isn't too late, but we're still late to the table.
Urgent action is needed on decarbonization. I'm sitting a few metres away from the truckers' protest, and I can say the need to go electric is definitely urgent.
However, should the government take immediate action to develop industries designed to produce batteries and components for electric vehicles in Quebec? Should it provide more support for the transition by helping to develop and assemble electric vehicles in Quebec and Canada?
Should the government's posture be aggressive? Should it provide large-scale funding equivalent to what it granted to the oil sands industry?
1:50 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Propulsion Québec
Absolutely.
We don't build motor vehicles in Quebec. We build other types of vehicles, which are very popular.
In future, mobility will be much more shared, much more optimized, and there will be a lot more smart vehicles. Those vehicles will be in high demand. Ontario is focusing more on the individual passenger electric vehicle.
Many public policies can be adopted, including federal zero-emissions legislation for personal vehicles, but also for medium and heavy vehicles. That project is already under way in Quebec, and in California, and it has done a great deal to help accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. These are all measures that could stimulate both supply and demand.
1:50 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I agree with you that legislation on zero-emission vehicles must be passed as soon as possible, even urgently.
What should we change about the way we address the value chain associated with battery manufacturing, including the various stages leading up to the final product, to vehicle assembly?
Do you think the decision to locate intermediate processing businesses near raw minerals and tailings sites is valid and desirable? Should we do the processing near the resources?
1:50 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Propulsion Québec
That would be desirable, assuming we process the resource rather than send our natural and strategic resources to be processed abroad. We should definitely keep them in Canada and do the processing near the resource. Battery cells could be produced in Quebec and then integrated into battery packs and vehicles in Ontario. That could be done by the automobile industry in Ottawa and Michigan.
This wasn't mentioned, but battery recycling should also be encouraged.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you Mr. Lemire and Ms. Houde.
Over to Mr. Masse now, for six minutes.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our guests.
Mr. Dahn, one of the challenges the industry had at the very beginning when moving to battery electric vehicles was the discussion—sometimes almost a false argument or a phony argument—about range. There was the perception that you needed to have 400 or 600 kilometres of range, and most consumers only go 50 to 60 kilometres around their immediate neighbourhoods, and so forth, but it led to a really big innovation period to increase the range.
I know Tesla has been involved in the advancement of some of this, but most recently, I think because of supply reasons, they're are actually going to be providing another vehicle line with less range in a battery. Can you outline the difference between the two and the quality of the metals resources for that? That's my understanding as to the status quo.
1:55 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
Thank you for that question. It's a really nice one.
The moderate-range, lower-cost vehicle will have a battery chemistry based on lithium iron phosphate. This is really quite good, because iron and phosphorus are highly abundant and very sustainable.
Another good thing about that technology is that it supports many charge/discharge cycles and many years of life. Those batteries and those vehicles could be used for things like vehicle-to-grid. The vehicle, when parked, could be storing energy from the grid when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing, and then at night or when the wind is not blowing, deliver it back. This, I think, is a really good move. Those vehicles still get a pretty decent range, probably 400 kilometres.
The other side of the coin is the extremely long-range vehicle, 600 kilometres or so, which uses more nickel-based positive electrode materials and has higher costs. People are actually worried—in the longer term, beyond 2035—about the availability of nickel. This is a concern. Tesla is going to be around for who knows how much longer—maybe a century, I don't know—but they're concerned about the availability of nickel as electrification just goes up on a giant hockey-stick curve.
I think it's really good to see the two streams of the technologies coming along and that each has a place. I think many consumers are going to vote with their wallet and go for the lower-range, lower-cost vehicle that's going to last a really long time.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Even regarding the argument for combustion engines, there's still a place for them, in my opinion, for different types of travel, and for vehicles that we have at the current moment. Maybe there will be a day when that fully transitions out.
I don't know if you can answer this question. If you can't, it's okay. I've always been curious about this. As we do research and development partnerships.... For example, where I'm from, the University of Windsor and others have been doing so. Is there an interest for Canada to also help get transferable technology into other types of devices? As consumers, we're finally starting to see them become more involved in lawn equipment, other types of e-vehicles and so forth.
I'm curious.... You have an academia background. I've always believed that's kind of being put on the sideline for some reason right now. Obviously the trucks, the cars and the newest models are always the sexy things out there, but when you're talking about lawnmowers, cutting devices and all kinds of yardwork stuff, you're also reducing emissions. I'm just not sure whether that area is getting the attention. Perhaps we could actually carve out a special niche for other types of vehicles and mechanizations.
1:55 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
It's quite likely.
One thing about these electric-powered yard machines is that they're incredible. I don't know if you own one.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
1:55 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
They're awesome—no oil changes, no gas.