Evidence of meeting #44 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 work.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Andrew Norgaard  Director, Public Affairs, National Research Council Canada
Sherif Barakat  Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Chad Mariage

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Good afternoon. Bonjour, mes amis, bonjour. I am pleased to be here. The chairman cannot be. I will endeavour to do my best to move the meeting along.

This is the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, in case you thought you were in the wrong room. This is meeting number 44. Our order of the day, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), is a study of the greening of electricity consumption in Canada--the role and future potential of hydro-electricity.

I would like to welcome our witnesses on behalf of the committee. From the National Research Council of Canada, we have Mr. Sherif Barakat, vice-president of engineering, and Andrew Norgaard, director of public affairs. I also have Jane Dyment, officer of physical sciences. Is Ms. Dyment here?

3:30 p.m.

Andrew Norgaard Director, Public Affairs, National Research Council Canada

She's not attending.

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Okay. Thank you.

Just as an explanation, members may recall that we had invited representatives from Hydro-Québec. Unfortunately, they are unable to attend. The clerk has informed me that he was informed Friday that they were not able to attend, and we were not able to schedule any other deputants in.

We will go with our witnesses, and also we have some other business. The clerk has distributed the travel itinerary for next week's visit to the upper Churchill hydro facility. So I'd ask members to look at that, and at the end of the meeting we'll discuss that.

Also, we have a motion with respect to making the necessary arrangements for dinner in response to the request that was made by a Mexican delegation. Were we also having this motion distributed? No? We didn't have the motion distributed. It's very simple:

That the Clerk of the Committee make the necessary arrangements for a dinner at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 5, 2007 in the Parliamentary Restaurant with the delegation from the Mexican Congress Energy Committee.

Do I have unanimous consent to put that now?

3:30 p.m.

Bloc

Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC

Yes, you do.

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Thank you very much.

(Motion agreed to)

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Thank you.

So things move along well in this committee, wouldn't you agree? If only it were always thus.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Barakat, are you going to lead off?

3:30 p.m.

Sherif Barakat Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Yes. I'm actually the only speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for inviting the National Research Council to present to your committee.

Although we don't have much to do with hydro-electricity per se, I think the committee is interested in knowing what NRC does in electricity work and particularly what we do in energy and environmental work.

The deck is distributed in front of you, and I'll talk to it in my presentation. I'll give you a brief overview of NRC and how we are contributing to Canada's energy and environment agenda.

Allow me to first talk about the National Research Council.

We are a national institution, a federal government agency. We are actually the largest primarily mandated R and D organization in Canada federally. We provide essential elements for science and technology infrastructure with labs across Canada. There are 25 research institutes and labs distributed from St. John's all the way to Victoria.

We have a budget of $835 million. Out of that, we actually get about $165 million or $166 million from outside sources and income from industry and other organizations. We have a staff of 4,300 from coast to coast in 25 institutes and centres.

Along with NRC institutes, we also have the industrial research assistant program, and I'll talk about that later on. We have the Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information, which is the primary provider for technical medical information in Canada. In many of our institutes, we hold a number of industrial purpose facilities. These are facilities where we incubate small and medium enterprise spinoffs to benefit from our facilities and expertise.

Under the NRC Act, NRC's primary mandate is to undertake, assist, or promote scientific and industrial research in different fields of importance to Canada. I stress the words “industrial research” because it's what we're involved in, and we're working very closely with industry all around.

As well, NRC's success is based on its capacity to anticipate S and T opportunities and to adapt its R and D programs and services to turn these opportunities into advantages for Canada. For example, in 1987, when life sciences was in its infancy, we established a biotechnology institute in Montreal. Today the institute has one of the largest groups addressing environmental biotechnology.

A second more recent example relates to identifying technology clusters and identifies nanotechnology as one that will have a future impact on the science and technology field. Along with the province and University of Alberta, it led to the establishment of the National Institute for Nanotechnology, which you may have heard about a number of times.

NRC has been the catalyst behind many waves of innovation. However, our concern is to always do the job even better and to always be aligned with Canada's needs.

The main goals of our strategy were published last year, in 2006, and it's called Science at Work for Canada. As part of this strategic planning process, we consulted almost 300 stakeholders. The message we received across the country was that they are looking for S and T leadership and focus. NRC's new strategy in Science at Work for Canada provides that focus.

The strategy's three goals underline NRC's commitment to create sustainable economic and quality-of-life benefits for all Canadians in three areas: to work with Canadian industry in key sectors and work with communities and technology clusters; to strengthen Canada's innovation system; and to contribute to Canada's national priorities. Underpinning all these goals, naturally, are partnerships, commercialization, and research excellence.

I'll now talk a little about NRC's contribution to Canada's energy and environmental agenda.

NRC as a whole contributes around $30 million per year in energy-rated R and D. In addition, we have between $5 million and $10 million from other government programs, such as PERD, the program of energy research and development, climate change, and the climate change action plan.

NRC collaborates with key partners like NRCan, Environment Canada, Agriculture Canada, and many others, along with universities and industry in all the work we do.

We believe that our activities fill a unique niche, complementing the efforts of other departments in bringing our expertise and leading-edge science as well as underpinning competencies and facilities to make a significant contribution to this priority area.

In the rest of my presentation I will provide you with a short list of examples of NRC contributions. I will present them as we align them to our strategy for key sectors, some for the innovation system, and some for the national priorities.

In the next slide we see the key sectors. We have done quite an extensive study to look at what sectors NRC should focus on. As you've heard, the idea was to focus. So we looked at sectors that have a large importance to the Canadian economy, where research is essential for their success, and where NRC can actually make a significant contribution.

We came up with the nine sectors listed as you see them around the circle there: aerospace, agriculture, automotive, manufacturing, bio-pharma, chemicals, construction, ICT, and electronic instrumentation. In many cases these are not new areas for NRC, but we will be revisiting our sector strategies and ensuring that they are aligned with the needs of industry now and in the future.

Certainly, over the years NRC has invested in energy-efficiency and conservation projects aimed at the needs of companies in these sectors. As we roll out our new strategy, energy research needs and barriers are being considered in the development of sector plans.

My presentation will point to three sectors and the energy-related work done by NRC for these areas. Let me first talk about construction.

In Canada, construction facilities account for 35% to 40% of national energy consumption. One of the largest generates about 25% of solid waste and consumes about 50% of primary natural resources. So it has a major impact on the Canadian economy and Canada's natural resources.

This is a sector dominated by SMEs that do not spend much on R and D. The R and D spending of companies is less than half a percent. It is about 0.1% to 0.2%, actually. Since 1947, when NRC was asked to produce a national building code, NRC has significantly contributed to the sector. Today NRC is responsible for 20% of the R and D done in this sector in Canada.

A primary way to influence the sector is still through codes and standards. Over the last five years NRC led the process that resulted in a new national building code, completely rewritten as an objective-based code to promote innovation in the construction industry.

In 1997 NRC published the first Canadian model energy codes for buildings and for houses. Currently, we are working with NRCan on a plan to update the national energy code for buildings. These codes are developed with extensive consultation with the construction sector, as well as with the provinces.

Recently there has been considerable debate about replacing incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents, which use 75% less electricity. At the developmental stage a few years back, NRC research on this technology and its impact on the vision of workers has contributed to the viability and acceptance of these new sources of light.

In addition, as a greener approach, research showed that integration of daylight in buildings can displace 50% of lighting in buildings. Probably you have heard that lighting is 40% of that list of consumption in large buildings.

Under the International Energy Agency, the NRC led an international project to overcome technical barriers to the adoption of such practices. Design software and demonstrations showed improvements in energy savings of 70% through relatively simple measures and controls. This has played a major role engaging the industry to increase the amount of daylight in new building design. The industry has called them daylighting measures.

As well, technology development in the sectors will be linked to demonstrations. NRC and its partners have also demonstrated and evaluated many technologies, including applications of co-generation and fuel cell technologies in the Canadian Centre for Housing Technology here in Ottawa.

The Canadian Centre for Housing Technologies, CCHT, as we call it, was built in collaboration with NRCan and CMHC with contributions from 37 companies in the housing sector. The goal of the centre is to accelerate the commercialization of new housing technologies mostly related to energy and indoor environment.

There is an example mentioned, again at the bottom, which you would have seen if you had looked at the National Post today, on leak detection in water pipes. This technology from NRC has actually now been taken up by a company, a start-up company, and they are making inroads in saving water and energy in large cities.

In the automotive area, NRC is making a contribution toward the development of lightweight materials and the processes to make them, including metals like aluminum and magnesium as well as composite materials and polymer nanocomposites.

We also undertake research on emission testing using laser-induced incandescence technology, or LII for short. This is a technology developed at NRC that makes it possible to measure the emissions of soot from the exhaust of travelling vehicles at parts per quadrillion, very minute parts, helping to enforce some of the world's toughest vehicle emissions standards. Some of these devices have already been built and are being used in California.

However, NRC's single largest investment in energy R and D has been in fuel cells and hydrogen, about $14 million a year. This includes the Institute for Fuel Cell Innovation in Vancouver, at the heart of the Vancouver fuel-cell cluster, and a cross-NRC program on fuel cells and hydrogen that brings expertise from eight other institutes to work on overcoming the barriers to manufacturability, performance, and reliability of fuel cells.

Again, this work is not performed in isolation: NRC is an active participant in all federal and national committees.

In another area, heavy-truck aerodynamics, developed at the NRC wind tunnel, has led to significant fuel savings. According to the number in our notes, it is 4.8 litres for each 100 kilometres a truck travels, or if you look at one year, a truck that travels 200,000 kilometres, for example, saves close to 10,000 litres of fuel.

In the aerospace area, NRC's Institute for Aerospace Research has built up a national infrastructure and competencies that support Canada's aerospace sector and are recognized internationally. Most of you will be familiar with the NRC wind tunnels at the Ottawa airport when you come. There are big wind tunnels with “NRC” on them.

We also call upon our aerodynamic expertise and facilities in these wind tunnels for other sectors. I mentioned trucks, for example, transportation, the location and orientation of wind energy farms, and the support of scientific studies and data collection for Environment Canada.

Our new Gas Turbine Environmental Research Centre here in Ottawa supports research on increasing the efficiency and reducing emissions of gas turbines. Researchers are now proposing to expand these unique facilities to allow the testing of alternative fuels, such as biofuels, biodiesel, and syngas in gas turbines. This would help find applications in stationary gas turbines used in generating electricity, the use of which is expected to increase two and a half times by 2030, generating 50% more CO2. This proposal has already attracted interest from industry partners.

Also, a Canadian breakthrough in manufacturing aerospace structures resulted from a project between NRC and Bell Helicopter Textron Canada, not to confuse it with Bell Canada. This collaboration resulted in a new process for the production of a lighter-weight, all-composite wingbox—this is part of the wing structure—designed for that next-generation aircraft. The very light structure actually reduces the weight and reduces energy consumption. The technology was transferred to a Quebec-based firm, establishing it as a supplier of aerospace-grade parts.

NRC is also working with Bell, Bombardier, and SMEs to advance the development, production, and use of lightweight composites in aircraft fuselage, which will result in further energy reduction.

From the IRAP side on innovative systems and how we help small and medium enterprises, the NRC Industrial Research Assistance Program, or NRC-IRAP, works with industry SMEs in the development of alternative energy projects. More than 20 industrial technology advisors have specialized expertise in alternative energy. They provide clients across the country with business and technical assistance, competitive technical intelligence, and funding for high-quality personnel as well as appropriate R and D projects.

The next slide shows you a number of projects I chose particularly to show the variety of work IRAP has supported. Over the past five years, they did around 40 projects worth more than $5.5 million. Examples here cover areas of biodiesel from different feed stock; solar modules that are grid-generated and grid-connected that go on building roofs; electricity from water currents, which is a small electricity system that uses streams and rivers to generate electricity; small hydro; and lightweight, small wind turbines.

In the area of national priorities, it has also become clear from our consultations and studies that in an era of science convergence, no single organization can accomplish much by working on its own. As I mentioned a moment ago, one of NRC's goals is to make a significant contribution to national priorities for the 21st century, specifically in health and wellness, sustainable energy, and the environment.

To meet this objective, we have committed to implementing a number of national programs addressing national priorities where NRC can use its research excellence, partnerships, and multidisciplinary approach to generate real, tangible results. The first of these national programs will be initiated with a focus on bioproducts, including bioenergy and biofuels.

NRC has a wealth of experience and facilities in this field. We will be collaborating with partners from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, NRCan, universities, and industry to develop a plan for that program—a Canadian plan. NRC's Industrial Research Assistance Program and CISTI will be an integral part of that as well.

This initiative has been met with great enthusiasm from all those approached. Last week I heard from Rolls Royce Canada when they knew of our choice to use biofuels or different gases in gas turbines. We are also working to expand our fuel cell program to become a future national program.

We do this, but we still look to the future for industry. NRC plays a unique role in helping prepare Canada's energy future. It is widely expected that the convergence among nanotechnology, biotechnology, and ICT will lead to future breakthroughs in several areas, including energy. NRC is well positioned to harness this convergence for the benefit of Canada.

For example, in the use of quantum dots in the development of solar PV materials, NRC has opened its incubation and prototyping facilities to Cyrium Technologies, a start-up company developing photovoltaic solar cell technology using quantum dots, a semiconductor nanotechnology originally developed at NRC. The company hopes to achieve conversion efficiency up to 38% at a lower cost.

A different example is NRC's unique contribution in metrology. Most scenarios for a green electricity future, as you well know, involve a variety of renewable and alternative technologies produced not only by energy companies and big hydro, but also by small producers and individual consumers. This in turn means new regulations backed up by novel methods of measurement and instrumentation. We're basing that on NRC's mandate for physical measurement and metrology.

To close, I would like to reiterate that NRC's work spans the innovation spectrum from discoveries at the frontiers of science to the commercialization of new technologies. For more than 90 years, NRC has been making valuable contributions to Canadian industry, to the growth of our economy, and to the well-being of Canadians. Working in partnership with industry, other government departments, and academia will strengthen the Canadian innovation system and contribution to energy R and D.

Thank you very much.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Thank you, Mr. Barakat.

We'll now go to questions and lead off with Mr. Holland.

April 23rd, 2007 / 3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Barakat, for your presentation.

We're talking about energy efficiency. Perhaps we could talk about the priority that Parliament should place on energy efficiency versus trying to develop technology and find ways of producing energy in more environmentally friendly ways.

I ask that in this particular context: One of the things we've seen is that every time we seem to make gains on energy efficiency, the number of appliances and devices that people are using grows at such a pace that we lose any of those gains in energy efficiency just because so many more devices are being used. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on the efficacy of pursuing energy efficiency versus spending more time on the ways in which we produce energy.

3:50 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

This is probably my personal opinion, but I think you can't do one or the other. You can't trade up between them.

Energy efficiency is very important for things like existing houses or existing buildings, or for increasing the efficiency of appliances, as you mentioned, or making cars more efficient. At the same time, if we keep going the way we're going, the International Energy Agency predicts that our energy consumption around the world will increase by 60% by 2010 or 2012. So we can't afford to sit and not find more alternative sustainable ways to produce energy, because we're going to need it.

It is not one choice or the other. We have to really tackle both of them.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

I don't disagree with you, but the question is on focus, and some have held out the view that it's not possible to curb the growth in energy consumption. Some have said that it's so rampant, with all of these other devices coming in, that restraining consumers would be too difficult. So the question is where we can find meaningful efficiencies. Where do you see the areas of real opportunity that we should focus on?

You mentioned retrofitting homes as an example, and of course we had the EnerGuide program, which has now been replaced by the ecoENERGY program. Where would you see that best being achieved?

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

It's retrofitting buildings, using daylighting, using more of the new lighting—whether it's compact fluorescents or the new technology of LCD lighting, for example, coming up: these are the things we could affect. More efficient appliances, more efficient use of appliances, less consumption by automobiles, and reduced consumption by trucks, which we have already worked on—these are things we have to look at.

In some cases it's quite different, particularly when we go into houses. That's why I guess provinces would like to look at buildings first, because they actually can apply things better at an institutional level than they can if they are depending on the homeowner to do it.

We can actually raise the bar by applying a very good energy code, and then by incenting builders to go above that or owners to go above the energy code.

These are things we could do in efficiency. There's still a long way to go. There are still some things that haven't been applied. I heard recently that Ontario is thinking of stopping the use of incandescent lights. How many of us use compact fluorescents around Ontario? There must be a great amount of saving there. Naturally, there's some incentive, actually. Compact fluorescents have gone down quite a bit in price, and if we increase the use, the prices would go even further down.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

You can probably help us here in Parliament to reduce our energy use by not having the heat on when it's 20 degrees outside.

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

I don't think you have the heat on, but I think the building doesn't have cooling. But anyway, maybe we're saving energy.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Maybe we're saving. I hope we're saving energy, and the heat's not on.

You had mentioned this growth of 60% in the amount of energy that's being consumed. I understand this is a hypothetical question, but I'm asking you, on the basis of your experience and personal opinion, if the government were to take decisive action and to really promote energy reductions and energy efficiency, where would you see that number being in that same time horizon? What do you think a reasonable expectation would be, in terms of what that growth could be?

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

That's very hard to actually predict.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

But do you think the government should set a target, or do you think it should just be—

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

Well, you can set a target for each application. For appliances you can—

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

But you don't have a sense of what that global amount would be if you were to apply something individually?

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

Not at all. I can't venture a number, no.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

But would you promote the idea of promoting targets within each area, and then trying to achieve those targets—

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

Yes, that could be done, although you have to look at the barriers to that when you do it. We had old programs in houses, under which people put more insulation in their attics. People have put more insulation when they could, and replaced appliances with new appliances. However, the next step is quite expensive--when you try to tackle retrofitting housing, particularly with bad walls, with windows. It's a difficult issue.

There is quite a potential. It's achievable, but you have to look at the barriers.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

I may be running short of time, but in your opinion, how effective were the EnerGuide programs that were put in place to help people retrofit homes? They were cancelled for a while and have come back as a similar program, renamed. In terms of achieving energy efficiencies, should those programs be held out as a model? Do you think they were something that—

3:55 p.m.

Vice-President, Engineering, National Research Council Canada

Sherif Barakat

I think Canada has had a number of good programs. I'm not sure what the impact of the last program actually was, but the earlier program, when we actually covered the easy areas, whether it was air leakage or insulation or leaky windows, and so on, was quite effective.

The program, for example, to change heating systems to high-efficiency heating has a major impact. If you have heating systems that are currently at a mid-efficiency of 82%, and that's not even in new buildings, and you encourage people to go to an efficiency level of 95%, that has a major impact.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks

Thank you, Mr. Holland.

We'll go to Madame DeBellefeuille.