Evidence of meeting #68 for Natural Resources in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was electricity.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Denis Lemieux Liberal Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
We want to develop inter-ties for green energies even though building new power lines falls under provincial jurisdiction. It so happens that each province has its own vision and its own philosophy.
Do you have suggestions to make to the federal government? Given all these visions, which guidance could it give to improve inter-ties between Canadian provinces in order to increase the amount of low-carbon electricity exchanged all over Canada?
4:45 p.m.
Chief Economist, National Energy Board
That really falls outside the role of the NEB. It's not something I could comment on.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
I've prepared one question for the NEB. I don't know how long this question is.
I realize that the core of NEB's role relates to Canada's oil and gas industry. However, part of NEB's purpose is to promote “efficient energy infrastructure...in the Canadian public interest.” Also, NEB's main responsibility includes regulating the construction and operation of “designated interprovincial power lines”. Even though NEB has jurisdiction over designated interprovincial power lines, by determination of the federal government, no such lines have ever been designated, leaving the regulation of existing interties to provincial regulatory bodies.
Why is that? What happened? Can you comment on that?
4:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
I can comment a bit on that.
The National Energy Board has been around since 1959. It was created around pipelines. We received the responsibility for interprovincial and international power lines in 1990, in a change to the NEB Act.
Since that time, no one has chosen—at least to my knowledge—to ask the Governor in Council to designate an interprovincial power line. It would require a party to go to the Governor in Council and say, “We would like you to designate our power line, or a power line that is being proposed, as an NEB-regulated interprovincial power line.” No one has done that.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Thank you very much.
Thank you for joining us today.
Our earlier witnesses, from ATCO and Capital Power, were saying that B.C., Alberta, and Quebec have surplus power. We are not even considering what's going on with the Muskrat Falls debacle, where they are giving away two-thirds of it for free, basically, in Nova Scotia.
With all these provinces in surplus, is there value to even looking at the issue of power going east-west, when everyone seems to be producing excess right now? That's even before Site C possibly comes on in 10 or 20 years, and Muskrat starts pumping it out.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
I think, from our standpoint, our role is to act on applications that are brought in front of us, not to question the larger policies of provincial governments to produce more electricity than they need.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
Sorry.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Ms. Milutinovic, we were talking about Site C, and Churchill Falls, of course, reared its ugly head. We used to live in Newfoundland, the two of us, and of course, it's an ongoing thing there.
You're an economist. What would be the length of a contract if, say, Site C gets up and going in 10 or 20 years, or whenever politics will allow, if we were to have a long-term contract for that provided to Alberta to avoid these interprovincial fights? Newfoundland's has been going on, I think, for 20 or 30 years now. What length of contract would we be looking at so that they're stable and reliable?
4:50 p.m.
Chief Economist, National Energy Board
I don't think that there is any special insight that I could give you on that one.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Okay.
Maybe you're the wrong people to ask, but do you worry at all about phasing out coal in Alberta and Saskatchewan, about the future capacity and avoiding brownouts, if we're not ready to switch to natural gas or if perhaps a government flavour du jour decides to get rid of natural gas production as well?
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
I think that, from the National Energy Board standpoint, no, we're not. We believe that the market of the day in Alberta does have a competitive power market and will adjust to meet the government's demands in the market at a price, and that will come out. Canada has abundant natural gas supplies and an abundant way to get them to the various kinds of markets.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
With regard to the electricity that goes back and forth between Canada and the States—we send down to them; they send up to us—I'm just wondering how closely you look at upstream emissions from the U.S. considering that two-thirds, a huge majority, of the electricity generated down in the States is from coal, generating, therefore, much higher emissions.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
We haven't done any studies on that. I'll reiterate something I said earlier. We do not regulate energy imports into Canada, so we don't actually look at them in the way that we would look at exports.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
I might be getting a bit off topic, but is it not a bit odd or hypocritical that we don't look at upstream emissions from the States for coal power coming into Canada, but we look at it for Alberta oil and our pipelines for upstream and downstream?
4:50 p.m.
Chief Economist, National Energy Board
It would be totally outside the board's mandate to look at that in the context of electricity.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB
Thank you, Mr. McCauley. Those were excellent questions.
Is it part of your mandate to have jurisdiction over the routing of transmission lines?
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Integrated Energy Information and Analysis, National Energy Board
For those transmission lines that fall within our jurisdiction, yes, it is.
4:50 p.m.
Chief Economist, National Energy Board
Under a certificate process....
