Yes.
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.
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.
1:55 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
It's incredible. They're so great. I have an electric lawnmower and so on. It's awesome.
In Quebec, there are all kinds of companies—and Sarah can talk about this—that make things like electric snowmobiles, electric jet skis and whatever the heck electric recreational vehicles. There are all kinds of things happening in Quebec that are really quite fascinating in the non-traditional electric vehicle/electric truck space.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Yes. I use a cord because I just don't want to store gas on my property. I know what happens, from being part of an environmental movement and the stuff I've been working on to get pesticides off lawns and so forth. If I end up filling up and spilling gas, oil and all kinds of different things, I do so much more damage. These things are really important.
I only have six minutes, so I'm going to switch questioning and go to Ms. Lilly. With regard to your testimony [Technical difficulty—Editor]. He did say, with this government at the time, in 2015, that they would bring in more transparency to the Investment Canada Act. I understand that we're going to have some barriers for some of those transactions that take place.
Could you give us a measurement of what's more transparent? I haven't seen it. I've been around for a little while and I'm not seeing a difference. I asked the minister quite frankly about this. He really didn't answer to my satisfaction. I really want to know if, in your view, there's more transparency than in the past. If there is not, what could we do?
I think it would be a lot more reassuring if we actually had a little bit more transparency or a third party review process for transparency. That would give more confidence than what just took place in this agreement we're looking at.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Mr. Masse and Professor Lilly, I'm sorry. We have time for a 15-second answer.
2 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Chair, I'll let this sit. I did this last week. I'll have my two minutes later. I'll give it to Ms. Lilly to fully answer later on.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
That's probably wise. Thank you, Mr. Masse.
We now turn to Mr. Kram for five minutes.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.
I'm going to have to ask Professor Dahn from Dalhousie University to turn our committee room into a classroom for a little while. It's been a while since some of us, including myself, have taken a high school and university chemistry class.
I understand that lithium is an element on the periodic table. Can you expand a little bit on what the difference is between lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide?
2 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
Sure. Lithium carbonate is a chemical that's used to make some of the positive electromaterials for lithium-ion batteries. It's a combination of lithium, carbon and oxygen. It has some very nice properties in that it's quite stable in the air and relatively moisture-insensitive.
Lithium hydroxide is a combination of lithium, oxygen and hydrogen. It's usually sold in the hydrated form of lithium hydroxide monohydrate. It's also used in the production of usually positive electromaterials that have a high nickel content.
These two materials are the most common materials used in the synthesis of the positive electromaterials for the lithium-ion battery.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
If I wanted to manufacture lithium-ion batteries, could I use lithium carbonate or lithium hydroxide as an input for the process?
2 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
If you were making, say, very high-nickel-content positive electromaterials, you would naturally pick lithium hydroxide. If you were making low-nickel-content materials, you would pick lithium carbonate. There are uses for both. You can convert one into the other if you have to. It's probably preferable not to do that.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
All right.
Which one would be preferable for the batteries? Is it the one with the high nickel content or the low nickel content?
2 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
This again comes to the area of energy density. High-nickel materials will provide larger energy density cells, which translates to a larger driving range. Typically, those materials would give a shorter charge/discharge cycle life, hence a shorter total driving distance for your vehicle. Lower-nickel-content materials would have smaller energy density, which would mean a shorter driving range on a single charge, but a longer calendar lifetime, typically.
For example, Volkswagen uses a material that would be synthesized with lithium carbonate. Panasonic, which supplies Tesla, would use a material that's synthesized with lithium hydroxide.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
If you were to provide some advice to us as policy-makers—which is why we have you at the committee today, sir—should we be concerned about Canada's supply of both lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide?
2 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
I think the lithium producers are able to decide whether they are going to make a carbonate plant or a hydroxide plant. I don't think it's that difficult—and maybe Trevor can set me right here—to have both on site if you want: make one, make the other, either way. But the key is to get one or the other from lithium in the ground.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
I believe in response to one of the earlier questions, you said the industry is always improving and we're moving in the right direction. Can you speak a little bit about the cost of deriving lithium from lithium carbonate or lithium hydroxide? Is it more expensive to get it from one or the other?
2:05 p.m.
Professor, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
It's not significantly different.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
Then I would like to move over to Mr. Walker, from Frontier Lithium.
Mr. Walker, you said you've been working in this industry a long time. Can you give us an idea of some of the regulations that a new mining operation would have to go through to go from the discovery of some new elements in the ground to actually extracting them and mining them?
2:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Frontier Lithium
Absolutely.
Before I dive into that, I will quickly agree with Mr. Dahn.
We are looking at a dual process to produce both lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide. We do see a cost advantage to produce directly from what we're blessed with in Canada in hardrock assets, directly to the production of lithium hydroxide, over our competitors in South America, who have some cost advantage going directly from brines to retention ponds to then produce lithium carbonate. This is just to finish off on that.
With regard to your question about what it takes to get into production, as I alluded to in the opening statement—
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Mr. Walker, I am so sorry it always falls on you, but the time is up. Hopefully, MPs address their first questions to you next time. Thank you.
I now have to turn to Mr. Fillmore for five minutes.
February 4th, 2022 / 2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS
Thanks, Chair.
I just want to extend a warm thanks and welcome to each of the witnesses today. Thank you for sharing your time and knowledge with us.
A special hello to Professor Dahn, from Dalhousie here in Halifax. Jeff, it's great to see you. I remember the day I visited your lab and you surgically unwrapped a battery showing me exactly how it works, and that stuck with me today. Thank you for that and thank you for being here today.
I want to come back to you with a question, Jeff, but first I want to address Ms. Lilly.
Ms. Lilly, it was not evident from your testimony that it has actually been several years since you were a Conservative staffer in the Prime Minister's Office of Stephen Harper. You made it sound much more recent than that. If I could ask you, do you have any knowledge of how many Investment Canada Act investigations were undertaken by Prime Minister Harper's government relative to the current government?
2:05 p.m.
Associate Professor, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University, As an Individual
I don't think that I commented on my time working in the Prime Minister's Office, but yes, it's a matter of factual record that I previously served in the Prime Minister's Office of Stephen Harper.
No, Mr. Fillmore, I can't comment. I do not know the answer to your question on the number of reviews undertaken by his government versus the current government.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS
Thank you, Ms. Lilly.
It's four times as many by the current government than happened under the previous government, four times as many of these investigations. I want to be very clear that our government closely reviews every foreign transaction involving critical minerals. That very much included Neo Lithium. So when the Conservatives are saying that no security review took place, that's absolutely false. The Conservatives are, at best, playing with language. They're cherry-picking a specific technical step further down the review process. That step is only triggered after we look at a proposed investment in great detail and determine if there is or is not a national security threat.
