Evidence of meeting #40 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was design.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
9:40 a.m.
Director, Canadian Arctic Program, World Wildlife Fund (Canada)
I would be on shaky ground, as Mr. Binder was.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
In your testimony, Mr. von Mirbach, you said we basically don't have the technology to deal with a potential spill in the Arctic. I asked senior officials from the relevant government department at the last meeting, if we lined up four or five engineers, whether we could get a consensus on that. They were unable to answer that, just as they admitted they don't factor greenhouse gas implications into their regulatory decisions either—licensing, for example.
Do you think we can get consensus that there is no existing technology to deal with this?
9:40 a.m.
Director, Canadian Arctic Program, World Wildlife Fund (Canada)
Will we get consensus? No, I think the issue will tend to be shaped according to people's interests. For example, we made an intervention and the entity agreed with us in general that the requirement to be able to drill a same-season relief well was important and should be retained. There was a point of contention around whether or not there were equivalent methods in place.
There are comparable or equivalent methods in place, but only for certain types of blowouts. A blowout that happens right at the point where the oil emerges, for instance, can potentially be capped. But a rupture in the pipe farther down can't be capped with a cap. On the statement that this is equivalent, it's equivalent but only for certain types of spills. Of course, if we could control the type of blowout that might happen we wouldn't need the provisions in the first place.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Mowry, you talked about the economics of your new equipment, your new system. If the Government of Canada were to follow through on the Prime Minister's promise to price carbon emissions at $65 a tonne in the next five years—an explicit international promise he made in London, England, in 2008 on pricing carbon—what effect would that have on the economics of your industry?
9:45 a.m.
President, Babcock and Wilcox mPower Inc., Babcock and Wilcox Ltd
With that type of carbon tax, a small reactor would be the lowest-cost baseload option available, when compared with coal or natural gas.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Are you in favour of carbon pricing? The Prime Minister was in 2008, but we're not sure where he is now. Is your industry in favour of carbon pricing?
9:45 a.m.
President, Babcock and Wilcox mPower Inc., Babcock and Wilcox Ltd
I don't think there is consensus in the industry. There are a lot of different stakeholders involved in this, and our company is involved in a lot of different clean energy technologies, including biomass. We think that the environmental impact of different technologies should be factored into how the technologies are viewed for deployment.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Mr. Chair, I want to thank our guests for coming today.
What I remember about the 2008 carbon tax is that the Prime Minister of Canada fought against it and so did I.
I am interested in these small modular reactors. Mr. Binder, you mentioned that there were five universities that have them. Which ones?
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
There's RMC in Kingston, the University of Alberta, the Saskatchewan Research Council—
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Yes.
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
It's on campus.
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
It's in the building. I did time in Alberta. I graduated from the University of Alberta, please. I know exactly what you're talking about. In fact, it's working very well.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
And we have École Polytechnique of Montreal. I think Dalhousie just signed the process of decommissioning. It has been running for 20 years or so. It's been running as a research facility and hundreds of students went through it. The fact that people don't know about it is good news. It's been working inside campuses, in the middle of campuses, without many people knowing about it.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
9:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
McMaster University.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
We have Babcock and Wilcox as witnesses today, but I remember Canatom used to be in the nuclear reactor business. Are they in business now?
9:45 a.m.
Director General, Directorate of Regulatory Improvement and Major Projects Management, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
That was before my time. I don't recall.
