Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for inviting us to present our proposal to you today.
We are a network of Quebec forest worker cooperatives. The federation, which has been in existence in Quebec for 70 years, represents 38 cooperatives that provide work for 3,000 persons. We are forest development specialists. We produce and plant trees. We have planted more than a million trees since our inception. We also do a lot of harvesting, transportation and road work. We are generally the suppliers of industrial forest concerns. Some cooperatives are also active in processing.
In view of the prices that the forest sector in Quebec and across Canada has been undergoing for more than two years now, we are seeking ways to improve our industry's competitiveness. Through our work, we have discovered that forest biomass is a very promising development opportunity. We want to propose that you consider it in your current analysis of the integrated approaches for providing energy services in Canadian communities. We believe it is a particularly promising opportunity for Canadian communities because it can improve and reduce our dependence on oil. It also assists in local development and land use.
My figures apply solely to Quebec. We have no information on the rest of Canada. As Quebec forests represent only 20% of Canadian forests, we assume this potential is at least as great elsewhere in Canada.
In Quebec, the department of natural resources and wildlife estimates that the potential volume of available forest biomass is 6.5 million dry metric tonnes. Stated more simply, that is equivalent to approximately 20 million barrels of oil a year. That is very significant potential. The resource is not entirely available for energy production and should not be used completely, but it nevertheless represents a very significant volume.
Unlike other energy sources, biomass is a sector with a number of very different segments. You can heat directly with biomass, logs or wood chips, as is done in institutional boilers, and we'll be talking to you about that at greater length. This biomass can also be processed into pellets and densified logs. You can also produce electricity and heat or just electricity or ethanol. However, the niche we consider most promising for communities is the direct heating of institutional buildings.
We have determined a number of reasons why our network is targeting this niche. First of all, from an energy balance standpoint, it is the most efficient way to use energy. For a unit of oil, we'll produce 15 units of thermal energy. In the case of ethanol, the ratio is one to 4.6; for pellets, one to six. Thus, we use all or virtually all the energy available from the resource.
We also achieve very low energy costs in short supply cycles. Supply costs are slightly lower than 3¢ per kilowatt, compared to 8¢ for electricity and more than 11¢ for fuel oil. It must be said that we were particularly concerned about the situation in the winter of 2008. So this is a promising economic option.
The technology required for this processing is available. High efficiency boilers are beyond any comparison with wood heating. There is considerable popular controversy in Quebec, but at the temperature at which the heat is produced, all gases are burned and steam emissions and dust levels are very low.
As regards employment, one job is created for every 500,000 metric tonnes of biomass. That's very promising for land occupancy.
With respect to improved industry competitiveness, we use roads created and equipment already on the land. It is impossible to challenge this under the softwood lumber agreement. It is simply a process improvement. That's very important and very beneficial for us.
In addition, the optimization of economic benefits for the communities is made possible through projects carried out at the community level and capital to which the communities have access.
The carbon footprint is also very good. Four cubic metres of wood is equivalent to two dry metric tonnes, which avoids releasing 2.5 tonnes of carbon. That's a very promising aspect.
This also has the benefit of decreasing energy dependence. Oil use has declined considerably, but long-term forecasts are a major concern and the communities are somewhat held hostage by this dependence. It must be understood that the cost of fuel for a wood boiler represents less than 50%, whereas the fuel cost for oil is more than 80%. These are very conservative figures. So this is already very promising.
We've briefly presented our federation's development strategy in this sector. We hope to provide energy to 300 to 400 institutional buildings, which would represent the creation of nearly 1,000 jobs and would capture 15% of available biomass. I'll spare you the details, but simply to say that this is a strategy. It is something very concrete, even though it is at the preparation stage.
There's one point I want to emphasize regarding our strategy, which would cost approximately $446 million to implement. The biggest cost is the cost of the equipment that the institutions need to acquire in order to make this transfer. It is in this respect that Canada could play an important role. We are currently seeking all possible solutions to get through the crisis, to create economic activity without recurring effects over time. This investment would help create sustainable jobs, and subsequent expenses would be borne through operations.
With regard to our requests to the federal government, what we're seeing is that, since the biomass for institutional heating sector virtually does not yet exist in Canada, it has not yet been addressed. We hope, for example, that the ecoENERGY for Renewable Power program, which subsidizes at a rate of $10 per megawatt for up to 10 years of production, can apply to the production of thermal energy from biomass combustion. Ultimately, the federal government is currently subsidizing power production from biomass. This is a minor economic aberration, if you consider that this electricity will subsequently be used for heating. It's not very efficient, and it would be better to fund the boilers directly.
We're also thinking of the ecoENERGY Retrofit Incentive for Buildings, which also concerns biomass, but which is extremely limited in scope because it is based solely on energy savings. It would be better to subsidize the biomass contribution as a whole as a substitute for thermal energies, fossil fuels and even electric energy.
The last federal budget included measures for the transformation to a green energy economy. Those measures reflect Canada's commitment to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. Those measures essentially address the development of carbon capture and storage technology. That's something that's very important to do, but we think it would be a very good idea to consider the biomass for heating sector. The $1 billion Green Infrastructure Fund could also be used to fund the transfer of institutional equipment.
Those are our recommendations. What we've come to tell you today is that, without really making a major financial effort, Canada can help improve its energy efficiency, help consolidate the communities and send a clear signal that we can develop green energy in Canada.
Thank you.