Evidence of meeting #65 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 technology.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Armstrong, it's a very important issue, but we are dealing with innovation. If you could tie your questions in with innovation, that would be great.
Conservative
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
There could be some innovation tied into that, but I'll move on to another subject.
The next subject I'm going to talk about is innovative. We have a tidal power project in the Bay of Fundy, which the federal government is strongly supporting. It involves some undersea electrical cables.
We're also going to see four new technologies from four different companies put into the Bay of Fundy. We already had Nova Scotia Power put one technology down there, and it received some damage almost immediately because of the power in the Bay of Fundy.
Mr. Wharton, do you have any knowledge of this project, and what do you see for the future of tidal power on the east coast?
Vice-President, Policy and Sustainability, TransAlta Corporation
If you like second-hand knowledge, from speaking with my colleagues from Nova Scotia Power, I would say it's extremely exciting from our perspective. The Bay of Fundy is essentially world-class in terms of its power capabilities, and we think Nova Scotia Power is doing some great work, particularly with firms in the U.K., looking at developing that technology. It's still in its infancy, but we see it as a great renewable energy resource, probably 10 years away from full commercialization.
Conservative
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
In 2013 we're hoping to see the four different technologies put in there and hopefully a request for proposals to see which company has the best technology, and moving forward on that.
As you're probably all aware, the other major project is the implementation of the Lower Churchill hydro project. The innovative nature of this is the undersea electrical cables, which are going to be put in place between not only Newfoundland and Labrador, but also Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, and run through Nova Scotia right into New Brunswick. Hopefully, any excess energy could be exported to Ontario, Quebec, and of course the eastern seaboard of the United States. The federal government has supported that with a loan guarantee, and I know that the NDP premier of Nova Scotia is strongly behind it. I know that the premier of Quebec is against it. We're not quite sure where the federal NDP are in supporting that loan guarantee.
This type of loan guarantee to support innovative technology in these projects, is that something you would all support?
Maybe Mr. Wharton could start.
Conservative
Vice-President, Policy and Sustainability, TransAlta Corporation
In principle, yes, but I would also say that our company is a strong proponent that, in the long haul, technologies and the economics of those technologies need to stand on their own and need to be sustainable, so we need to be quite careful that we can get things started, but we can't continue to subsidize over the long haul.
February 7th, 2013 / 5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you very much, Mr. Armstrong.
We go now to Ms. Day. Welcome back to our committee for today's meeting. Go ahead, please.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. I am glad to be back at the committee.
First, I would like to correct something that Mr. Armstrong said. The premier is not opposed to energy loans. It is because it was offered to another province, and Quebec had not benefited from that same kind of loan. That's why she was opposed to it.
Why does Canada lag so far behind in developing geothermal energy? We need only think of a country like Iceland, which has been developing this energy since the 1970s and 1980s.
My question is for Mr. Thompson.
Representative, Chief Executive Officer, Borealis GeoPower Inc., Canadian Geothermal Energy Association
I'll go back to my original two answers. We've an abundance of other easier options to develop first. Now that we have exhausted those options to the greatest extent, we don't really have the regulatory infrastructure in place to allow projects to proceed, summing up a variety of other points.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Could you please give us some concrete examples of large-scale use of smart grids?
Managing Director, SmartGrid Canada
In the province of Quebec, Hydro-Québec undertook a project over the last five years to add something we call “distribution automation”. There are many switches on the distribution system, and before you would always have to wait for a customer to call to say his power was out, and then people would take that information, map it out either on paper or in a computer system, guess where the power outage was, and then send a truck to search for the power outage. Now Hydro-Québec has installed, I think, close to a thousand of these remotely controllable motorized switches, so instead of waiting for us to send a truck to switch it out, we're able to do it from the control centre and get people's power going much faster.
Hydro-Québec is a very large utility, a very leading utility, and they did that project with very, not rudimentary technology, but it wasn't rocket science in any way. It was adding a motor to a switch on the pole. It was a good model for the rest of Canada to emulate. That's one good example.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
So, smart meters are part of what you offered when you created this system.
Does Hydro-Québec use smart meters?
Managing Director, SmartGrid Canada
Smart meters are very useful when you're trying to change customers' behaviour as to when they use electricity. For example, in Ontario they had quite a large peak demand, meaning that the majority of energy was used in the middle of the day. Just to meet that peak, they were having to build new power plants. In Ontario it made sense to implement smart meters; they could tell which time of day power was being used and charge more for the middle parts of the day, so they could avoid building those new power plants. That made sense in Ontario.
In Quebec, where they have such an abundance of hydroelectricity, Hydro-Québec is able to supply that peak power need. Now it's good for Quebec to conserve power so that they have more power to sell to the States to make money for the people of Quebec.
In Quebec I don't think it's part of their strategy. Use of smart meters is definitely not a universal strategy for every jurisdiction. It's a decision that each province will have to make case by case.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
With respect to research and development, how would you describe what you have undertaken? Are we on the cutting edge?
Managing Director, SmartGrid Canada
I would say that in some areas we're at the forefront. For example, the smart meter project in Ontario is the largest implementation of time-of-use rates in the world.
California and Ontario took on their projects at about the same time, starting in 2007. Both projects are finishing up about now, but Ontario is the only one that's charging customers based on the time they use power.
Other innovative projects are around renewable energy. We've all seen the large wind farms and the large solar plants. However, in some jurisdictions in Canada they're getting renewable energy near local country roads. This is on the low voltage distribution system. Being able to accommodate that renewable energy is also very innovative.
The third part of innovation, for which we're getting a lot of interest from around the world, is using wireless spectrum. That involves being able to use wireless signals over the WiMax network in a very fast time frame, which allows you to do protection in hundreds of milliseconds. That's also very innovative, and that's where we are leading.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mrs. Day.
We go now to Mr. Anderson for up to five minutes.
Go ahead, please.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I would like to follow up on some of the questions Ms. Day had.
Mr. Bettencourt, I'd like you to talk about—and I'm going to use the word carefully here—the delicacy of these systems. We've had questions, and we actually did a study on integrated energy systems, and smart grids were part of that. But as these systems become more complicated, they seem to become more delicate, or they have a tendency...if one thing goes wrong, an entire system is impacted.
It's as simple as something at my home. I had a generator in the past and it was a case of flipping a switch, turning the generator on, and I had power again. I have a new system there now that relies on a 400-amp switch and a generator relying on a 9-volt battery that has to be charged in order for that entire system to work.
I just wonder if you'd speak to that issue a little bit.
Managing Director, SmartGrid Canada
The smart grid is really being laid on top of its existing technology. At the end of the day, the distribution system is transmitting electricity—electrons over copper wire—into your home, and they are going to be the same systems transmitting that electricity. The physics of transmitting electricity have not changed.
What is being changed is that on top of it there is the ability to add sensors. So instead of waiting for customers to call in to say they're out of power, we'll know in advance; we'll know at the control centre, and we'll be able to do something about it at the control centre without needing to send out a crew to find the outage. We'll be able to remotely control those switches.
If there are provinces that are pursuing a policy of integrating renewable energy onto their distribution systems, they'll be able to add in all that new flexible voltage regulation technology that can accommodate those renewables without causing the power to be of bad quality for everybody else along that feeder.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I guess the challenge is to make sure the system that's overlaid the other system doesn't interfere with it in terms of reliability.
I'd just like to switch to Ms. Kenny for a minute. A couple of weeks ago, I understand about 16 environmental groups wrote a letter to one of the railways—I think it was CP. Basically they were trying to convince them that they should stop shipping oil because they said that railcars weren't as safe as pipelines. I think we have a pretty good safety record in terms of rail, but I just wonder if you are aware of that and if you have any comments to make about the safety record you have. You made a couple of comments earlier. Are you aware of that letter that went out?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Energy Pipeline Association
Yes, I was aware of that letter. I think that is further evidence of any and all tactics to try to undermine the safe delivery of energy across the country. The purpose of rail and pipelines is very different. Their functioning is very different. One is a tube of steel, a metre under the ground; the other is large, heavy equipment running across the countryside. Rail, in its class, has a fantastic safety record. We should all as Canadians be very proud of that and know the scale of effort that goes into that safety record every day.
When you're moving large quantities of energy, occasionally there can be incidents. Both pipelines and rail are heavily, heavily regulated. We happen to have fewer incidents, I think largely just because we are under the ground. But still, in all, there are many options, in terms of transport, and they're all important to Canada in their own way.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Could you talk for a minute about the corrosivity of bitumen? A lot people think that there's some issue there. Is there an issue? If so, what's the solution? If not, why has that idea caught on?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Energy Pipeline Association
There is no issue in bitumen, in terms of pipeline safety or corrosivity. It is a complete fallacy. We've done a lot of science on this. In the simplest possible terms, I would point to the operating record of systems that have operated moving dilbit. They are not experience any abrasion. There is no internal corrosion. When and if we have a break because of corrosion, it's 99.9% of the time from external corrosion. We know that well. The metallurgy's clear. This is an absolute falsehood. I can't suggest why someone would intentionally mislead the public or create fear, but, nonetheless, it is patently false.