Evidence of meeting #17 for Natural Resources in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was debate.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Howard Brown  Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources
Hassan Hamza  Director General, Department of Natural Resources, CANMET Energy Technology Centre (CETC) - Devon
Kevin Cliffe  Director, Oil Division, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resourses

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

We have a couple of items on the agenda to deal with today, motions that were carried forward from the previous meeting. At this point, and after brief discussions, it occurs to me that the presenter of the motion is not yet here. We have witnesses scheduled and in place, so I'm going to ask the committee its indulgence to proceed with the witnesses. If there is time at the end of the meeting we will deal with the motions of Mr. Cullen, should he arrive.

Do we have agreement? Thank you.

I also want to advise the committee that at the Liaison Committee this morning the budgets were approved, including a budget for a visit by the committee to the oil sands in Alberta on November 18 and 19.

If there's any further discussion we can probably defer that. I won't keep the witnesses any longer.

Let me welcome Hassan Hamza and Howard Brown. Also joining us is Kevin Cliffe, who is the director of the oil division, petroleum resources branch. Welcome.

We will allow you to make an initial presentation. It's going to be a little different this time because we are simply seeking information today.

Mr. Brown, are you going to begin?

At your leave, go ahead, and then when you have completed that, we'll go to questioning.

Mr. Brown, perhaps I could ask you to begin.

3:30 p.m.

Howard Brown Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to be back here in front of the committee.

The oil sands is an area that has obviously attracted a huge amount of interest recently, and that's not surprising, given the scale of the investment that's being talked about there, given what's happened to crude oil prices, and given the political instability in some oil-producing parts of the world.

There are also some big and difficult issues connected with the oil sands, and my colleagues and I would be happy to shed as much light as we can on these issues. I don't want to disappoint you, and particularly not in advance, but there are a couple of areas where we won't be able to help you out.

As you noted, Mr. Chairman, we're here to provide information. Policy questions we'd have to refer to the relevant ministers. And questions about the Clean Air Act, which may well have important implications for the oil sands, I'd also have to pass on, simply because I'm not qualified to really answer those questions. With those constraints, we'd be happy to provide as much information as we can.

Mr. Chairman, we've circulated a deck. I think it's gone out to the committee in both official languages. I could take ten minutes or so to go through it quickly and provide background information, or we could just go directly to the questions, as you would prefer.

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

Actually, I think the committee had discussed it prior to your appearance and the consensus was that you would go through a presentation, so I'd welcome your going through the deck, perhaps leading us through it.

Does everyone have it in both official languages?

3:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yes.

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

Fine, then perhaps you wouldn't mind proceeding with the deck.

3:30 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

Excellent.

Starting on page 2, we note that this natural resource is not only important in economic terms but indeed is strategic, given its position in a politically stable part of the world. Established reserves are estimated at 174.5 billion barrels, but in fact the ultimate resource is likely to be significantly larger than that. Just to put that in context, 174.5 billion would make these the second-largest reserves in the world, after Saudi Arabia.

As I mentioned at the start, there are some important issues raised by the development of the oil sands--perhaps most importantly, the environmental footprint, but also what it might mean for natural gas markets, and whether the pipeline capacity is adequate, whether there is enough labour, and so on.

Slide 3 shows you the scale of the oil sands deposits. It really is enormous. It takes in roughly half of northern Alberta. There are oil sands deposits in other countries. I am told that upwards of 70 countries have oil sands deposits. The largest are in Canada and Venezuela. Canada is the only area in the world where these reserves are being commercially exploited.

I think there is some interest in Saskatchewan, where there are also oil sands reserves. I believe there is actually exploration going on there. It's a matter of great interest to the Government of Saskatchewan.

Here I do want to acknowledge--I don't think I need to do this, but I want to for the record--that it is of course the Province of Alberta that owns the resource. Since the government of Mr. Mulroney dismantled the national energy program, respect for jurisdiction has been a very important principle underlying the energy policy of all governments. That certainly continues today.

Slide 4 tells you that the big area we saw on the previous slide is 141,000 square kilometres, or about twice the size of New Brunswick; so we now know how big New Brunswick is. They're reserves of different deposits. The ones that were exploited first were the ones that could be mined, the ones closest to the surface, but there is work going on now on some of the deeper stuff. There's interest in the kind of middle area in between, where I think we don't yet have the technologies but where a large part of the deposit lies.

Slide 5 explains a little bit about the physical properties of the resource. I am now going to exhaust my knowledge of chemistry by saying that the deposits there are bitumen, very long chains of hydrocarbons, which means a lot of carbon and not too much hydrogen. That presents some challenges. In addition, it's mixed with sand. So there are really two sets of challenges that need to be overcome.

On page 6 we have a picture of the trucks that bring out the six-year-old in all of us. Initially long conveyor belts were used in the mines, but it was found that the trucks were more efficient and more reliable. There are commercial developments going on now using what they call steam-assisted gravity drainage. That technology injects steam to liquefy the bitumen and make it flow, and then it's pumped out and exploited. There are other technologies being experimented with. Toe-to-heel air injection actually involves underground combustion to generate heat to make it flow. Vapex involves the injection of chemical diluents.

Slide 7 is a representative projection. I think this one actually came from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers...or no, from the oil sands technology program. But no matter which projection you look at, whether it's from us or from industry or from the National Energy Board, people would see synthetic crude and bitumen from the oil sands growing in importance in terms of Canada's oil production. By 2030, perhaps as much as 5 million barrels a day could be extracted from the oil sands. In context, that's about twice Canada's total production at the moment.

On slide 8 we can see the very large number of projects proposed, some of them from very well-financed companies with very solid engineering behind them, and others perhaps more speculative. The total investment announced for between now and 2015 is $125 billion.

I think most observers would not expect all of that investment to actually happen. Some of it's quite speculative, and some of it may be deferred as a result of cost increases and so on. Nonetheless, an extremely large amount is going to be invested.

Slide 9 talks a bit about what our responsibility is. I mentioned that the provincial government has ownership of the resource, but the federal government has important environmental responsibilities as a result of our responsibilities for navigable waters and fisheries. And there's certainly an interest in Ottawa in making those processes no less effective, but perhaps more efficient, than they currently are. The federal government has important responsibilities in terms of the overall policy framework, including the macro-economic policy framework ensuring a stable place to invest. And we do have a long-standing involvement in technology development in the oil sands and other areas of energy. Dr. Hamza can tell you a bit more about those.

Slide 10 goes one level below that and talks about our role. We're the centre of expertise under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and we have, much to my surprise, responsibility under the Explosives Act. But I would say that perhaps our key involvement in the oil sands is through Dr. Hamza's institution, the Canada Energy Technology Centre in Devon, Alberta, just south of Edmonton.

Slide 11 recapitulates some of the issues we flagged earlier: what does expanded production mean and what issues or problems need to be solved? As you can see, market access is certainly an issue, as are natural gas availability and pricing, and pipeline capacity, and so on.

So if we turn to those, the first question is whether there are markets out there for bitumen. The answer to that is undoubtedly yes. The United States is of course the world's largest market for energy in general, and crude oil in particular. There are near-term capacity constraint questions about whether the pipelines will get the crude to the areas where it needs to go. Because of those constraints, and because bitumen and synthetic crude tend to be marketed in a limited area, they often do trade at quite a significant discount to west Texas intermediate, which is the benchmark, of course.

Slide 13 asks the question, what about natural gas? As most people are aware, natural gas is used to fuel the oil sands production. People sometimes overestimate the importance of Fort McMurray and the oil sands in terms of North American consumption. The oil sands today represent about 1% of total North American consumption, and that's projected to remain pretty much stable over the next 15 years or so. So 1% is a non-trivial amount of North American product, but it isn't an amount that makes or breaks the natural gas market. I think it's also clear that going forward, there will be much more interest in other fuels, in particular in gasifying what they call the bottoms, the very sticky residue, turning that into a synthetic natural gas and using that for fuelling.

Slide 14 shows you the key links in the North American pipeline network. At the moment, most of our bitumen and synthetic crude are marketed in Chicago and to a lesser extent in Colorado and Washington State. For this to be economic and the producers to reap the maximum economic return, the market needs to be diversified a bit within the United States. So new pipelines are probably needed. There are a very large number of pipeline projects on the drawing board that have been announced. They will not all get built, because if they were, pipeline capacity would be something in the order of twice as much the amount of marketable bitumen synthetic crude available. So some of those will fall out for competitive reasons.

On refinery capacity, I think this is not an issue per se, but there is an issue about whether the refineries are equipped to handle bitumen and synthetic crude. There are some projects under way in the United States at the moment, and perhaps will be in Canada in the future, to convert the refineries to be capable of carrying more and ensure they are able to handle larger amounts of product from the oil sands.

Labour availability is probably the biggest problem facing the oil sands in the short term. Canada as a whole is probably at full employment—and you have to work pretty hard to be unemployed in western Canada at the moment. So this is not a problem unique to the oil sands, but you tend to see it more directly there because of the very large numbers of people involved in very large projects. The federal government is doing what it can to help. For example, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration has opened what they call “temporary foreign worker units” in Calgary and Vancouver, as a pilot project to help ease those constraints.

Certainly it is true that at the moment there aren't the skilled people needed to do all the jobs that have to be done.

We have talked a bit about technology, and I'm sure there'll be questions on this. CETC, the western research centre in Devon, has been a major player in this for a long time. It currently has a number of projects under way to improve the economics and reduce the environmental footprint of oil sands production.

In conclusion, this is a resource of great strategic importance to North America. It's hugely important to the economics of Canada. It's been a benefit not just to Alberta, but to all Canadians. Certainly, there are some short-term challenges that we and the Government of Alberta are working with industry to overcome.

Those are my introductory remarks, and I'll be happy to take questions.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

I would have been happy to have you take another hour. That's a lot of information in a short time. I hope that over the next month or two we will be able to fully absorb what you've just said to us.

Before we go to questions, I would like to ask Dr. Hamza to give us a brief background on the CANMET Energy Technology Centre and its relationship to the Alberta oil sands.

3:40 p.m.

Dr. Hassan Hamza Director General, Department of Natural Resources, CANMET Energy Technology Centre (CETC) - Devon

We are part of the energy technology programs sector from Natural Resources Canada. It has three hubs: Varennes, Quebec; Ottawa; and Devon. Devon is focused on oil sands and heavy oil.

We have been in the Edmonton area since 1956. We began by working on coal. So we have a long history in being part of NRCan, or Energy, Mines and Resources, as it was formerly known. We have always worked in collaboration with industry to solve problems and to make sure that things are done in a more responsible way.

We moved to Devon in 1994. Since 1995, we have been focusing on oil sands and heavy oil. We have between 80 and 120 scientists and engineers, depending on the projects. We have a large number of collaborations with industry. We have a number of consortia with the province. We have joint programs, partnerships with the province of Alberta and with the university. We have a university activity on site. We have 12 Ph.D. and M.Sc. students doing research with our scientists and the University of Alberta.

3:45 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

Mr. Chairman, if the committee is planning to visit the oil sands, I'm sure Dr. Hamza would be delighted to take members on a tour of Devon. It's well worth seeing. It really is very impressive.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

We had considered visits earlier. I agree with you that it would be an excellent opportunity, but our time is limited. One of the reasons we're happy to have you here today is to respond to questions.

Thank you. Allow me to begin questioning, then. I don't know if we have a list yet, so we'll start with Mr. Tonks.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Alan Tonks Liberal York South—Weston, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very much, Mr. Brown, Dr. Hamza, and Mr. Cliffe for being here.

I'm sure the committee is looking forward to going up and seeing the projects first-hand. I know I am personally. I have questions in two areas that have given me concern.

Regarding the extent to which the present operations are impacting on groundwater, and affecting fish, water consumption, and water pollution, are we monitoring the extent to which that is a valid concern, and are we developing a strategic plan to deal with that? That's the first question, Mr. Chairman.

The second question concerns greenhouse gases. In her report, the Commissioner of the Environment indicated concern with respect to greenhouse gases as they relate to present modes of operation. Again, are we monitoring the implications with respect to the quantification of that, and again is there any strategic plan to deal with that, as we look at these other technologies and these other approaches?

Those are my two questions. Perhaps, Mr. Brown, you'd like to lead off on that.

3:45 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

With respect to the question about water, I think there's no question but that the availability of water is potentially a constraint on oil sands development, because not only is oil sands production energy-intensive but it's also water-intensive.

You'd asked whether we were taking mitigating measures, whether we were monitoring, and so on. I'd observe that any oil sands project coming forward would be the subject of an environmental assessment, including scrutiny under both the Navigable Waters Protection Act and, importantly, the Fisheries Act. So my answer would be yes, on a project-by-project basis, that kind of scrutiny would be a matter of course.

I think your question, though, was a bit different. It was more about the long-term vision of the law as opposed to the kind of micro examination of it block by block. That is an important question, and one that I think the producers are very aware of. The figure that sticks in my mind--and Hassan, you may know this better than I do--is 90%. I believe 90% of the water used now in typical oil sands production is recycled.

3:50 p.m.

Director General, Department of Natural Resources, CANMET Energy Technology Centre (CETC) - Devon

Dr. Hassan Hamza

It's almost that.

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

It's almost 90%, so the drop from the Athabasca River is very limited. Nonetheless, you will inevitably reach a point at which you're taking all the water from the river that you can, and then the only way you can expand beyond that is to improve that rate of recycling, or develop technology so that you're becoming less water-intensive.

I'd point to two aspects here in the longer-term dimension of the issue. The first is something that the Government of Alberta is undertaking, which is called the mineable oil sands strategy. The federal government is participating fully in that, and I would say enthusiastically in that, to look at some of these longer-term issues and at how we might address them.

The second way we're addressing it is through science and technology and research. There are, in fact, projects underway at C-Tech on water use in the oil sands, and on how we reduce that.

With respect to carbon dioxide, because oil sands production is energy intensive, it follows that it is, by definition, greenhouse gas intensive. It is also the case that the production of hydrogen, which is used to upgrade the bitumen to make synthetic crude, is also intensive in the release of greenhouse gases. Here I would point of course to the tabling today of the proposed Clean Air Act, which lays out a strategy for regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

3:50 p.m.

Director General, Department of Natural Resources, CANMET Energy Technology Centre (CETC) - Devon

Dr. Hassan Hamza

If I may add one thing about GHG production, it is not only coming from the energy intensity, but it's also coming from the vapours that are released from solvents being used to mobilize the oil. Some of these solvents are equivalent to 21 times the carbon dioxide, so a small amount of them produces 21 times more carbon dioxide. That's another thing worth paying attention to. Reducing these amounts will mean the GHG impact will be less.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Alan Tonks Liberal York South—Weston, ON

Thank you.

That's my question. Perhaps Mr. St. Amand would like to use up the rest of the time.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson

I think, again, that we're going to be a little more informal with committee members today, but let's just go through it and take a couple of more minutes, Mr. St. Amand, and then we'll carry on to Madame DeBellefeuille.

October 19th, 2006 / 3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON

Thank you very much, gentlemen, firstly for a very cogent, focused presentation. We don't always say that, so when we say it, we mean it.

As I read it on page 14 of the deck, vis-à-vis the pipeline network, new pipeline capacity will be required within the next four to five years. Looking at the map of a good chunk of North America, are we talking about parallel pipelines--parallel to the existing pipelines--or about going into new areas?

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

The answer to that is both of the above. As I mentioned, there are a large number of proposals currently on the table, because business is able to see that there is going to be a capacity constraint. I would say that this will be within the next four or five years, and I think it will more likely be within the next two or three years. Then some of these projects will come on stream, and if all goes well and the environmental assessment works out and so on, I think capacity will then likely be adequate.

Without necessarily wanting to promote one company rather than another or one project rather than another, I'll just mention a few things that are being proposed.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON

Excuse me. Is this the current network?

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

That's correct, and the network is, of course, much larger than that. These are the major backbone pieces.

There is a proposal to significantly increase the capacity of what's called the Trans Mountain Pipeline, which runs from Alberta through to Vancouver. That would allow greater amounts of product from the oil sands to go to refineries in the Puget Sound area of Washington State. Then some of the Alaska crude that's currently going there would go to refineries farther south, perhaps to Oregon and California. That would be one area of increase in supply in an area that is currently taking some product, but not a huge amount.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON

At whose cost is the pipeline network currently maintained and subsequently built?

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

Ultimately, it is the consumer of the product. The person who fills up her gas tank at the service station is paying the cost of it. This is all privately developed, so it would be private pipeline companies. And the economics of it is that typically, a pipeline company, before it puts pipe in the ground, would ask shippers for firm commitments. So in effect, they are renting a portion of the pipeline and they pay that rent whether they use it or not.

There are also projects being proposed, I think, in the area around Chicago, which is probably the biggest single market for product from the oil sands, to take oil sands product farther south into the U.S. Midwest and even down into the gulf states. That would be a second area of expansion. That, I think, is probably where the largest number of projects and the largest projects are. The third area would be to increase capacity south from Alberta into Wyoming and Colorado.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON

You'll know that certainly there are groups or entities that have called for a moratorium on any new development. And it's beyond dispute, with millions of tonnes, or however this molasses is measured, being extracted from the earth, from varying depths, that it's very invasive for the land. Truly, it's invasive, and there are some impacts.

What is your reaction when you hear that there should be a moratorium, that we have to just slow down production?

3:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, energy policy sector, Department of Natural Resources

Howard Brown

I think I'm being asked for an opinion, and I'm just wondering whether.... It's such a tempting question to respond to, but I think you are asking me for an opinion, and prudence dictates that I pass on it.