Natural Resources Committee on April 2nd, 2009

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

You have one and a half minutes.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

My question is for Mr. Abiola or for Mr. Schaafsma.

In your presentation, you often make the statement that this or that should be done. Could you talk to us about some best practices, or are you still just in the study phase? Could you provide us with concrete examples of things you have done or things you have seen in Europe or elsewhere and that have served as a model for you?

[Dr. Abimbola Abiola]

Thank you. I'll be quick.

I will give you a couple of examples of some of the things we have done. In Alberta, in the area of waste management, at our campus we've spearheaded and we've worked with communities in the area of composting of waste. Every community, every municipality, in Alberta now has a waste management system where they are composting and recycling their material.

The other example is that over the last two years we've been working with producers, both in oilseeds and in some of the cow-calf operations. We are producing biodiesel on our campus and we are introducing it into communities. The local counties are using it. Our municipalities are using it in school buses. Many of our farmers are also using biodiesel and many of them are ready to use it. They only need help to have the technology to use it.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Thank you, Dr. Abiola.

We'll now go to Mr. Hyer.

Mr. Hyer, you have seven minutes.

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

At roughly two minutes each or less--less would be great--would any of you care to comment on specific policy recommendations you would make to direct this committee, the House of Commons, or this government to facilitate the use of solar, biomass, or whatever your area of interest is? If you were to have influence--and you may have influence today--what would be your top one or two policy recommendations?

A little bit from each of you.

[Gordon Shields]

I think the first goes back to an earlier question. I think we need a dedicated program toward a vision of net-zero-energy housing, a fundamental transformation in the way we look at housing in this country—not to impose a federal presence over all provincial jurisdictions but rather have a vision that can be shared across the nation, much like the model national energy code is shared across the nation, but one that's geared around net-zero energy.

Second, that program or initiative should be endorsing community-scale demonstrations. The knowledge is there. The capacity is growing. It is the economies of scale that we need to drive down into now. If we get to the economies of scale, then the market can decide how best to find a solution on how to grow the net-zero-energy principle across Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Would anybody else like to comment? Ms. McDonald.

[Elizabeth McDonald]

First of all, I'll go back. We need a stated vision that has objectives tied to it, and then from there the programs will appropriately fall out, rather than having programs before you have a vision.

I think we also need a commitment to informing our citizens. The desire to adopt new energy or communities or net zero is high. The information that can be found from reliable sources--that is a challenge. I know that from the daily calls, and they will soon increase as people go back to their cottages and wonder how they can adopt renewable energy, and they'll ask me, which is not good.

The final thing, and this is really important, is that the Government of Canada needs to lead by example, not only in doing more and larger demonstration projects, as they are through the Net-Zero Energy Home Coalition, but also through their own procurement practices. There's an office within GWPSC, etc., but it's always difficult to do.

We have quite a thriving IT industry here in Canada because the Government of Canada is very active in that area. It procures from Canadian companies, etc. There is not really a commitment in a very tangible way, and that would make a big difference. Certainly in the U.S. it was done through a presidential direction from the previous President, not this one. It has made a big difference in terms of what government buildings are doing, and in fact in some cases they're using Canadian technology.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Mr. Schaafsma.

[Dr. Art Schaafsma]

Thank you very much. I think the federal government ought to have a look at incentives and policies towards developing this net-zero concept for rural communities so there's a bridge between the rural communities and agriculture, trying to close that loop not only for energy but also for water and nutrients. It's a big future problem.

Also look at the scale of how we do things: rather than having a highly centralized form of agriculture and industry, try to scale that down so the loop is a lot closer and these various commodities—energy, water, and nutrients—flow in a tighter circle. It's not to dumb down agriculture but actually to make it more sophisticated and more technology-resourced to achieve those goals.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Thank you.

Mr. Oliver.

[Bob Oliver]

Thank you. I would do three things in the context of integrated urban energy systems. I would first commit the principles of integrated urban energy systems to all federal building projects, construction projects, new buildings, and all that, wherever applicable the six principles can be shown to apply. That would demonstrate leadership.

The second thing is I would develop and fund, through the use of demonstration projects and federal studies, the development of an integrated urban energy system how-to guide for communities, complete with benchmarks and examples of how to do this in various communities. Every community will have a slightly different look to it when the principles are applied.

Third, I would begin to move on the development of funding programs to help communities develop their own energy plans, so that when they do move forth on expansion and growth, they're doing it with that information in hand.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Good.

Mr. Hyer, Dr. Abiola would like to reply to your question.

[Dr. Abimbola Abiola]

I have just a couple of things. I think the government should still be willing to set objectives. I remember in 1999, when they set the objective to reduce waste in Canada by 50% by the year 2000. Many communities reached that goal across the country. That actually initiated provinces to follow through. The federal government has to be a leader in setting those objectives.

The second one, especially with energy, is that one of the things preventing people from adopting renewable energy is the fact that if they produce the energy, there are a lot of restrictions on being able to put the energy into the grid. Through legislation and other things, government has to make it easier, at the home and the municipal levels, to be able to generate electricity and put it there, and compete with the big guys.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

You have 45 seconds.

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Those are all my questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

That's it? Okay, thanks, Mr. Hyer.

We'll now go to Mr. Anderson for seven minutes.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start with something I've been waiting to ask, and I don't know if you folks are the right people, maybe not, but we're running out of committee time here to ask this. I'm from the Prairies. When it was settled 100 years ago, people came out and many of them ended up digging down to find shelter and then covering themselves up. They found that to be a reasonably stable environment.

I'm surprised. I waited for someone to suggest that there's something we can do underground. I would be interested in your take on that--we're all going to spend a fair amount of time six feet under. Once you get down to a certain level there, you're below the frost line; it seems to me you have a stable environment that settles down your energy use and those kinds of things.

You have a comment on it, Dr. Abiola, but I'd be interested in hearing from Net-Zero as well, as to whether that's being considered as a major part of Net-Zero planning in terms of housing and those kinds of things. I think we have technology to get the light into the areas. I understand why people may not want to live there, but is it energy efficient to do that?

[An hon. member]

We're going to call you Groundhog Anderson.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

I have a gopher problem in my area, but I want to be one of them.

[Dr. Abimbola Abiola]

I just want to give two examples. Many communities, especially municipal governments in Alberta, for example, are now going geothermal for all their municipality buildings, and it is very efficient. I think the federal and provincial governments have to do the same.

Geothermal is efficient. Many of our greenhouses in Alberta are now going to look for energy in geothermal. We have partners we are working with who want to bring geothermal technology for heating our compost. I think that would work.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Then is there a reason some buildings should also be in the ground?

[Dr. Abimbola Abiola]

Buildings in the ground--I don't have the expertise in that area, so I cannot make comment on that.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

If anybody else has a comment, I'd be interested.

[Gordon Shields]

You're asking the coalition, and I'm sorry, at least in terms of the experience we have with some of the demonstrations that have happened to date, no, nothing underground.

I would concur, though, on the point of geothermal. That's about as close as we've seen where any interest is about going underground and in any capacity. But I would also make the point that the way we approach this is technology neutral, so where geothermal or solar might have its validity or viability in one part of the country, it may not be as viable in another part of the country. Geothermal and other technology options will vary, but if we take a neutral approach to this and look at it as whatever works in a particular region, then that's best.

But I'm afraid I can't answer you on the principle of digging deep into the ground. Sorry.