Natural Resources Committee on June 15th, 2006

[Kory Teneycke]

The CGSB is looking at these issues. They have a B1 to B5 standard in place. The ASTM is looking at the cold flow issues as well. The Europeans are. It looks like the North American standards are going to tighten a bit and the European standards may loosen a bit, and we may have something that is more of a global standard.

There is lots of work being done by the petroleum industry, by our members, by other agricultural organizations like the soybean growers in the U.S., plus the standard-setting bodies that are looking at these issues. There's one thing everybody agrees on, and that is we want to make sure we have a safe fuel that works, that isn't going to cause problems. Hence, there is very close association and work with OEMs, engine manufacturers.

[Alain Perez]

Since we're not having the discussion on ethanol, because there are no issues there, the only point we've made and will keep on making is that we're sure we can achieve 5% ethanol by 2010. But because of these discussions, as you can see, we're far from sure that the same could be achieved for biodiesel specifically. That's our only point.

[Jesse Row]

I just want to make one quick point on the numbers we've heard, the minus 1 °C to minus 47°C for the diesel in Canada. That varies, depending on the season and where you are. In most of the country, obviously, you're going to have a higher number in the summertime and a lower number in the wintertime. So most of the country doesn't need to get down to the minus 47°C, but I believe minus 30°C is the number I've heard in the research we've done. So in the range we're trying to deal with, in the majority of the country, the gap isn't quite as big as the numbers had indicated previously.

The other point we should keep in mind is that if you're blending 5% into the fuel mix, then obviously you don't need to overcome that gap with 100% of the fuel. You're able to do it with a smaller contingent of it.

So these are all the issues we did work on with the energy company I had mentioned, and certainly they are confident that they will be able to overcome that gap.

Right now, what systems are in place? What systems do we need to put in place to make sure that we have a high guarantee? When we talk about producing biodiesel, it's not the guy in his garage we're talking about. It's these large-scale plants.

Right now, the plants that are out there test every batch that comes out. They know exactly what's coming out, the standards that are coming out. We're not going to see the range in the literature. The literature just basically says this is what people are making right now. But when you go and buy biodiesel, you're going to know exactly what those properties are. So assuring that it's mixed properly is probably the biggest question out there at this point.

[Jack Belletrutti]

I have a paper here that provides a chart you could look at. It basically shows, as you add more and more biodiesel, how that affects cloud point and what the effect of some additives could be. I'd be quite happy to leave that behind, if you want to have that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

When you look at it, Mr. Trost, perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain it to the rest of us.

We do have some housekeeping matters on the agenda. We have a notice of motion before the committee. So I'm going to have to wrap it up now to get to that before one o'clock.

Thank you very much. That was fascinating and very helpful. In addition, I'd like to perhaps put you on notice that we may like to have you back in the fall. It sounds to me that there is some interest in this matter and we may want to pursue it further. So thank you very much for this time, and in anticipation of future meetings.

We have a notice of motion before the committee. It has been circulated, but I'm asking that it be circulated again.

To begin this final portion of the meeting, I'll ask Ms. Bell to move the motion.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

I guess I'll just move it and then talk about it afterwards.

The motion is as follows:

That witnesses be given 10 minutes for their opening statement; that, at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated as follows: Round 1 (7 minutes): Liberal Party, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party, Conservative Party; Round 2 (5 minutes): Liberal Party, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party, Conservative Party.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I think you all have the motion in front of you. This has arisen because we have given some latitude to questions in the last while; it kind of got a bit out of hand and the questions got a little longer, so it resulted in us not getting around.

I have also asked the clerk to distribute the original motion, for your information. This was one we had some considerable debate on at the first meetings.

The current system we are operating on, if we would stick to it, gives every member an opportunity to ask a five-minute question. That is based on the makeup of the committee and the makeup of the House. It would coincidentally give every member a five-minute question should we get to the fourth round.

We haven't gotten to the fourth round, and that has precluded the opportunity for the Bloc to have a third question and the NDP to have a second question, because in the earlier rounds we just took too much time.

As chairman, I apologize for that, because we have allowed a little more latitude to these people, but my sense is that if we did stick to the original program, we could actually get everybody in.

Be that as it may, you have that information. There is a motion in front of you, and now I will ask for any debate.

Did you want to discuss it further, Ms. Bell?

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you.

The issue came up from the clerk, I believe, and was circulated. I've substituted for other members on other committees, and what I'm proposing in the motion is consistent with other committees—the seven minutes and five minutes.

As much as I appreciate the latitude of the chair in allowing debate and discussion longer than five minutes, I can see that it would cause some problems at some point, with points of order and things like that. So if we're going to have rules, I think we should stick to them. If the rules are not adequate, then perhaps a change is in order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I think that says it pretty well. If the chair sticks to the original motion we may be happy with that, otherwise we had better make some changes.

Are there any other comments?

Mr. Harris.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I can't support the motion because the numbers become a little bit skewed. In fact, if you look at the total time in the current situation, the NDP is getting ten minutes in round one. Asking that it be changed to seven and five will really only give the NDP two more minutes, but at the same time it will take three minutes away from the other parties in round one. So for the sake of two minutes and losing three, I think it's better that we stay the way we are, with ten minutes in round one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Does anybody else want to comment?

I think it's pretty clear what we have here.

Ms. Bell.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Just to comment on Mr. Harris's point, we've never actually made it to round two in this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Actually, we make it to round three almost every time.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Okay. I'm thinking of the whole round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes, your second round, which would be round four.

(Motion negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I will just advise the committee that I have a commitment with the World Urban Forum in Vancouver next Tuesday. I've asked the vice-chair, Mr. St. Amand, to chair the meeting next Wednesday.

Until then, we'll adjourn to the call of the chair.