Evidence of meeting #5 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was use.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Carol Buckley  Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Department of Natural Resources
Michael Harcourt  Chairman, Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow
Kevin Lee  Director, Housing Division, Office of Energy Efficiency, Department of Natural Resources
Michael Cleland  Representative, Industrial Organizations, Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow
Kenneth Ogilvie  Representative, Environmental Organizations, Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Good afternoon, everyone.

We're here today to start a study on the contribution of integrated approaches for providing energy services in Canadian communities.

For the first hour and a half of this meeting we have witnesses who are at the table now. For the last half hour we've agreed to talk more about where we want to go with this study. As well, there are a couple of other things that we should consider and that I'd like you to give input on, and those are the estimates and the supplementary estimates. It's just something for you to consider. Of course, we have a responsibility as a committee to deal with them.

The other thing I would like to mention today is that we did receive, in both official languages, the Ottawa Riverkeeper's submission that was requested. They have delivered that, so you can read it whenever you wish. The department will be sending the information it committed to send at the last meeting. It takes some time to put together. That will be coming. It isn't forgotten.

Let's get right down to the business of this committee. We have two presentations.

Mr. Cullen.

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Through you, Mr. Chair, to the clerk, I want to mention something that might be prepared for when we get to the discussion on the calendar. Oftentimes in committees we've been able to use a blank calendar to get some sense of the balance of things, rather than a list. I don't know if the clerk can have some of those made available or if they have been passed out yet. An easier way to talk about the balance of meetings is to have copies of that calendar for committee members to see as well. We get our discussion moving a lot quicker when we can see where the break weeks are.

I'm more of a visual learner, so that helps me out quite a bit.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Sure. It's a good idea that will be helpful. I'm sure we can have that available by the time we get to that discussion.

If we could go ahead now, welcome, everyone, to the committee.

We have as witnesses, from the Department of Natural Resources, Carol Buckley, director general, Office of Energy Efficiency. From Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow, Michael Harcourt, chair, Kenneth Ogilvie, representative for environmental organizations, and Michael Cleland, representative for industrial organizations. Welcome to you all.

We have two presentations of 10 minutes or less, and we will start with Ms. Buckley from the department.

3:35 p.m.

Carol Buckley Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Department of Natural Resources

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you to the chair and the committee for inviting Natural Resources Canada to come to address you today about integrated community energy systems.

I am very happy to appear here with colleagues from the private sector who also share an interest in this topic.

I'd like to start by defining integrated energy systems, because exactly what we mean when we're talking about this subject is not something that springs to everybody's mind. When my colleagues, Mike Harcourt and the others, speak to this they will be using the same general definition.

Traditionally, when we think of how energy is used or how it is supplied, we look out across the city as we travel through it and we see individual houses. We see schools, hospitals, light industrial parks, and each one of those entities makes their own decisions about how much energy to buy, what sort of energy to buy, and what kind of equipment they use in their organizations. That's the easiest way to make decisions. You just have one entity to deal with and decisions are relatively simple, but there are a lot of inefficiencies in using energy and in supplying energy that way.

There is no use of economies of scale. There is no use of waste energy product or waste products between organizations. We find that if there are entities that are putting in leading-edge technologies or practices, it is often very limited in scale and therefore in impact. What we'd like to talk about is an integrated approach to using energy and supplying energies across a community or across a neighbourhood. By this we mean taking the energy use and energy supply decisions and fanning them out over a number of different uses across heating, cooling, lighting, and getting around or motion. We'd also like to think of it across the sectors I've been mentioning--housing, building, transportation, and industry.

When we integrate traditional energy choices, there are enormous opportunities for savings. We've been looking at energy use with respect to environmental improvement, specifically with respect to climate change, in a serious way for about 10 years, and our approach has been very sectoral. We have industrial programs, residential programs, and building programs, and we're talking about looking at it all together in an integrated fashion.

There are benefits apart from the benefits to the environment, and those include dealing with our land better, dealing with transit choices, dealing with waste and water shortages.

I'd just like to take a bit of a closer look at integrated energy use right now. If we were to look at a community that has....

I'm looking around to see if you have the presentation I'm reading from. That wasn't distributed. No? Okay.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

No, we don't have that.

3:40 p.m.

Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Department of Natural Resources

Carol Buckley

I'm sorry. I'll make sure it's supplied to the committee afterwards, and I'll just speak to this.

I'll give you a little more definition to how an integrated community system would work. We're talking about maximizing energy efficiency in the construction of the buildings themselves, as well as in the practice of energy use within the building and all of the technologies deployed within a building. So it's maximizing efficiency, and maximizing the use of renewable energy as well in order to minimize the energy demand, whether it's solar, hot water, or domestic ground source heat pumps or other renewables. These often have a significant cost premium, but that premium can be mitigated by bulk purchases and bulk installations, which would happen when you're dealing at the community level.

We're also looking at district heating systems, so not just supplying heat to one entity but supplying heat to a whole pool of entities from one centralized, right-sized heat provision combustion device. Finally, we're looking at the transit and the land use of a community, and maximizing the density and ensuring that it's zoned for multiple uses.

That really gives a bit of a picture of what an integrated community would look like with respect to its energy use, and the end result would be savings as far as the emissions are concerned, and savings, too, for those who are paying for energy and using it in those instances.

I'd like to give you a couple of examples of Canadian integrated communities with respect to energy. There is one near Edmonton, Alberta, called Emerald Hills, and it has 1,600 residential units--there is retail, there is a health care/medical complex, a nursing home, and some mixed-use buildings. So it's higher density and a greater mix of building types than most communities, and they are going to have a community energy system to supply the heat for the entire community.

Another development that is developer-led is Dockside Green in Victoria. It's a brownfield redevelopment right in downtown Victoria on the harbour. It's residential condominium units, as well as multi-family buildings, with heat generated through a biomass gasification system and waste water and brown water treatment to reuse the water.

A third example comes from Alberta and the town of Okotoks, and this is called the Drake Landing solar community. This is a very small project that only involves 52 single family homes, but it's really quite special in that it's first in the world in using a technology that stores sunlight collected in solar heaters on the garages of the subdivision; it stores the heat energy underground, and then that is used to take care of 90% of the heating needs of this small community throughout the year. We've been running this one for over a year now, and John Marrone, my colleague here, can tell you more about it. But it's running above expectations. It's currently supplying 100% of the heating needs from the sun. The community is integrated, in that the homes are built super energy efficient to begin with--they're R-2000 homes. So that's another example of integrated energy use in a community setting.

The type of situation I'm describing is admirable for cost and energy and emission savings. Why don't we see more of these, and why do I have to spend five minutes here defining what I mean when I talk about an integrated community with respect to its energy use? The reason this is fairly rare--we can come up with a dozen or more examples across Canada--is this is exactly the opposite of the status quo in the way energy use is designed and the way energy is actually used in communities.

When I was referring earlier to all the individual decisions that entities make, an integrated community energy plan requires the integration of a large number of individuals, and that's very hard to put together. There's low awareness of the savings and of the potential from the energy or environmental or waste or other perspectives, and there is a quagmire of rules and policies and codes that actually prevents this kind of activity. I'll just give you a couple of examples.

Many planning regulations support low-density building, and even penalize redevelopment in the core of cities, which makes it more expensive to do an integrated community project. In some provinces and some jurisdictions, the local utility companies are forbidden from being part of an energy production facility, which limits their participation as a partner and potential financer to this kind of work.

What we at Natural Resources Canada are doing is contributing from a couple of different perspectives. We do research and development on the technologies that would support an integrated community, for instance, the biogas system I just mentioned, which had input from Natural Resources Canada, and solar storage and many other technologies.

We also support an integrated community approach through a policy framework. Kevin Lee, who is here, is leading a federal-provincial-territorial exercise to develop a road map for those jurisdictions to identify the policies and programs that would support an integrated community fashion of work. Kevin is also leading on developing across the Government of Canada, 12 departments, a standard way to measure energy use at the community level. It's not as simple as measuring the energy used in a building because you're moving across a lot of different mixed uses. In addition, we demonstrate technologies as well as practices.

The final thing I'd like to say before I run out of time here is that we look forward, at Natural Resources Canada, to continuing to support the thinking around integrated community solutions through, probably, the three planks that I've just described—through policy support, through R and D support, and also through the programs that we deliver on energy efficiency and renewable energy. We will, through our work on the road map, determine what areas are in the most need and continue our thinking about how to address the barriers of lack of awareness, lack of attention, and lack of tools, and see where we can be most useful.

I'm speaking to you today from really a pre-program development perspective, where we're thinking about the issue and trying to understand the challenges and opportunities. I welcome your questions.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Thank you very much, Ms. Buckley.

I just want to introduce the other two gentlemen at the table: Kevin Lee is director of the housing division with the Office of Energy Efficiency, and John Marrone is from Canmet Energy, Ottawa.

I'm not certain who's making the presentation. Mr. Harcourt, go ahead. You have up to ten minutes for your presentation.

3:45 p.m.

Michael Harcourt Chairman, Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm delighted to be here as a recovering politician, somebody who was in the trenches for 24 years and escaped before the posse caught up with me, and I'm delighted to be the honorary chair of QUEST, which is quite a remarkable initiative that was started by the two people beside me here, Mike Cleland from the Canadian Gas Association and Ken Ogilvie from Pollution Probe, a very successful NGO that deals with these issues and has for a very long time--both of these two have. It has become quite an exciting activity over the last two years, and it has grown organically, with a quite impressive variety of people who are participating, from government, from business, from the community.

I thought I'd give you a quick update of where QUEST--Quality Urban and Community Energy Systems of Tomorrow--is at and why we think it's important that you know about us as you launch on this study that you're going to prepare over the next few months and that then will be available, we hope, to be acted on. We have talked to the minister, Lisa Raitt, about our activities and she is quite interested.

I thought we should say, why QUEST? Why are we here before you? I think it's because the communities of Canada represent 50% of Canada's energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. So there's a huge opportunity to deal with some of the issues that we're facing now in terms of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, and other effects of that.

I would argue, as a former mayor in Vancouver before I was demoted to being premier in British Columbia, that cities are where 100% of the consumption of natural capital, of forest products, agricultural energy, and mineral activities eventually takes place, 75% directly and 25% from the factories and mines and farms and oil and gas, and other activities like that in rural areas that supply our cities with the consumption that takes place there.

So Canada's cities and communities, and we're not just talking of Toronto, we're talking about all of the communities that make up Canada, big, medium, and small.... I was involved in a report I prepared for Prime Minister Martin and handed in to Prime Minister Harper on the national role in Canada's cities and communities. If you want to have a look at that, it describes those kinds of issues. So we think it's important that QUEST exist to start to grapple with solutions to that huge consumption of Canada's energy and creation of greenhouse gas emissions, and we think existing approaches to greenhouse gas mitigation mainly focus on the energy supply issue, and they fall far short, as you can see from grappling with this issue, of the policy targets that we need to make or probably will need to address very actively and aggressively in the next few years.

So we think it's of huge importance to Canada's citizens.

We also believe that an integrated approach is going to bring all kinds of benefits. If you're taking an integrated approach to energy systems in Canada's communities, we believe it will deal with the potential insecurity about energy and some of the other impacts of energy use. It will build a more sustainable energy future, deliver greenhouse gas emissions, let us go to a no or low carbon environment, reduce many other environmental impacts, and provide more affordable energy and more reliable and resilient energy services.

I'll tell you about a remarkable document that the Canadian Gas Association sponsored in 2002-03 for an International Gas Union competition to see what city could come up with a 100-year plan that would address the future shortages of energy. Canada--Vancouver, in particular--won this international competition and put together this project called citiesPLUS--PLUS standing for planning for long-term urban sustainability.

We found that when you backcasted to pick the future community you want for Montreal or for Swift Current or for Prince Rupert, for yourselves and your kids, and you then put a 20-year to 30-year transition strategy in place and then 10-year capital and operational plans, one of the byproducts of that integration of approaches was to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 70% to 80%, just by doing what we're talking about.

We think this approach is hugely important for Canada to undertake. We can get you copies of this, Mr. Chair, for your committee members to have a look at. Seven of the world's leading urbanists looked at this very real community called greater Vancouver, with 2.2 million people, being one of the nine finalists to address this series of issues successfully, and they won the grand prize in Tokyo in 2003. So there is a lot of good work that has been done in Canada, and we think QUEST is part of that.

The QUEST vision, as you can see from the material I think you have, is that by 2050--and being the optimist that I am, I hope sooner--every community in Canada will be operating as an integrated energy system, and accordingly, all community development and redevelopment incorporates an integrated energy system. That's our vision.

Our mission is to foster a community-based integrated approach to land use, energy, transportation, waste, and water, and to reduce related greenhouse gas, air pollutant emissions, and waste.

This is the vision and mission that then guided us to becoming much more specific and concrete and community based.

Who is involved in QUEST? If you look at page 8 of the submission, we summarize that we have many federal government departments and organizations involved, a number of provincial governments and municipal governments across Canada, certainly the energy industry, environmental groups, the building sector, and academics. So we have quite an impressive number of people who are involved in this initiative.

I'll just quickly summarize our guiding principles. They're to improve efficiency; to optimize “exergy”, which in simple language means you don't use electricity for space heating, you use more appropriate geothermal, solar, and natural gas, and you use electricity for other power-related activities; reduce waste, and we think there are all kinds of ways, and we've got examples, to reduce waste; use renewable resources more and more; use grids strategically to be able to technically handle renewables and fixed grids and those sorts of very important technical issues.

We think the building blocks are starting to form up across Canada in the following ways: the integration of land use and transportation so that transportation, rapid transit and buses, shape more dense and liveable city centres and transit corridors. So integrate land use, transportation, energy, water, and waste systems. Do not do them separately; combine them.

We think there's an enabling platform for that in higher-density, mixed-use developments of energy efficient buildings. You've heard some examples here today of how that is starting to happen in Canada.

The backbone of it is smart district energy and utility grids that allow better management of available energy.

We think moving to distributed, smaller-scale, local energy systems, which we describe in the citiesPLUS project, is the way we're going to evolve in our communities.

Use local renewables, solar, geothermal, wind, and biomass--and we've certainly got lots of biomass in B.C. with the pine beetle that we're going to have to find a use for.

We're suggesting those are the kinds of directions we need to go in and those are the building blocks.

We have been building momentum, particularly in the last six months or so, from the initial discussion to the point where we've moving to implement. We are looking at a number of demonstration projects in various provinces and municipalities.

In conclusion, we think what the federal government needs to do, and we'll talk about this in questions, is support the move to the QUEST vision from the fringe to the mainstream.

Secondly, there has to be ongoing support for building further momentum. Ensure that technology funding, program funding, infrastructure funding helps create through green infrastructure more sustainable cities and communities, and that integrated energy systems are a central part to that future vision of Canada's cities and communities.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Thank you very much.

We will now get directly to the questioning, starting with Mr. Regan for up to seven minutes.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'll begin by thanking all the witnesses for coming here this afternoon to join us and to help to edify us a little bit.

This question, by the way, is for Ms. Buckley, if I may.

Yesterday, my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche, Jean-Claude D'Amours, received an e-mail from his riding with a concern about the eco-energy program.

I'm going to read you a little bit from this message:

I take the trouble to write to you about the federal share of the Eco-Energy program. Here is my situation:

Last fall, I replaced the windows of my house. I followed the steps required to ask for the reimbursement of eligible expenditures. In October, I forwarded the required information for the provincial program and for the federal program. Within six weeks, I had received the reimbursement from the provincial government, and that is when things started to fail.

Today is February the 25th and I have still not received one cent from the federal government. I followed up three times with the company that carried out the tests in my house. Each time, I got the same answer: “Be patient, sir, your cheque will arrive soon”. Yesterday, I once again called Mrs. Anne Bourque, from that company, who told me that the federal government was out of money. That all the funds for this program had been spent without all the expenditures being reimbursed! So, she seemed to imply that my check had been authorized and that it is probably...

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Regan--

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Chairman, we're talking about renewables. This is related to the question.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Regan, this is a question that doesn't fall within the topic we're talking about today; it is a specific question for the government. If you'd like to invite the minister back, I'm certain she would be willing to come back at some time with the appropriate officials prepared to handle this or any other question. But when it comes to departmental officials, I think it really is important that you stick with the issue that was intended to be handled.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Chairman, the intended issue, as we discussed, of course, was renewables. It wasn't solely the more narrow area that is before us today. We talked about renewables generally, and this is certainly related to renewables. Moreover, Mr. Chairman, you yourself explained when the minister was here that in fact there was a wide leeway given in terms of the kinds of questions that were allowed at this committee. I'm very surprised—

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

To ministers, absolutely. You would know that, having been a minister, Mr. Regan.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

No, Mr. Chairman, you didn't say to ministers.

We have a witness here who is responsible for eco-energy, which is certainly directly related to what we're supposed to be talking about here today, which is the general idea of what's happening with renewables, what's happening to improve our situation with energy in this country. Part of that is allowing people to have the programs working, sot that, whether it's their community or their own home, they can get assistance to make it more efficient. We appear to have a problem. The most important program that is part of that for those people out there is out of money, and you don't want to let her answer that question. Forgive me, but she would be the person, it would appear, responsible for this program.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Again, Mr. Regan, I think it would be appropriate if you would like this particular issue to be dealt with to just request that the minister come back.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, are you telling me that we only can ask questions about programs and how they're operating in the department when the minister is here? That's certainly not been my experience, and I can tell you that when I was a minister, the officials would come and answer all kinds of questions, including about what was happening in their programs. So I can't imagine that you're suggesting to me that you're going to narrow the line of questioning that much.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Regan, I'll tell you what; Ms. Buckley can decide whether or not she's prepared to answer that now.

Go ahead, Ms. Buckley.

4 p.m.

Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Department of Natural Resources

Carol Buckley

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm happy to reassure you that the program is not out of money. Budget 2009 announced an extra $300 million to be spent over the next two years. As well, 52,500 Canadians have received their grant. That's a lot of transactions to deal with.

In terms of this particular individual, I'd be happy to take that under advisement and inquire within the program as to what went awry. You can appreciate that I wouldn't be able to answer that off the cuff here.

So there is money in the program, we have additional money from Budget 2009, and I would be quite happy to find an answer about this individual case. It doesn't sound as though it has met our usual service standard of getting the cheque out the door. Give us a little bit of time to refer to the files for an answer on that.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

It seems you are a very appropriate person to answer that question. Although you'll want to inquire about that part of it, you are responsible for the program. I appreciate your answer.

Are you aware, then, of any backlog in processing rebates?

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Anderson.

4 p.m.

Conservative

David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, our intention for today was to discuss the community energy partnerships. That was the mandate for the meeting today. Mr. Regan doesn't seem to either be interested in that subject or able to focus on it.

This is what we agreed last week we were going to do. I would appreciate it if you would keep him on task, if you possibly can.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

On the same point of order, Mr. Chairman--

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit

Mr. Anderson, I have spoken to that. I recommended to Mr. Regan that we do stick to the topic we're here to discuss. I think we've handled that issue.

Go ahead, Mr. Regan.