Natural Resources Committee on June 18th, 2021

[Dr. Mark Zacharias]

You simply can't repurpose a natural gas or oil pipeline into hydrogen without re-sleeving it and doing a number of other retrofits. It's not easy, and it will be a while before that technology scales up to a point where it's cost-effective.

Having said that, if hydrogen is used adjacent to where it's produced, the cost of storage and transportation can be quite low. For example, for hydrogen that would be generated near a city like Vancouver and then input into the natural gas grid, either at 20% through an existing pipeline or at 100% through a dedicated hydrogen pipeline, those economics could work at some point in the future.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

How much can you actually input? I forget.... I think you mentioned this in your opening remarks. It was around 15%. How much hydrogen can we input into natural gas pipelines?

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

You have 30 seconds.

[Dr. Mark Zacharias]

Right now, it's 20%.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Twenty per cent?

[Dr. Mark Zacharias]

Maximum.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

The maximum right now.... You say “right now”. Can you explain?

[Dr. Mark Zacharias]

Well, depending on the age of the pipeline and depending on the equipment at the end that's going to be burning the fuel, you could have domestic or commercial equipment that could use greater than 20% hydrogen in the gas supply.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

That's your time, Mr. Lefebvre.

Mr. Simard, over to you.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to ask Mr. Wolinetz another quick question.

Mr. Wolinetz, you talked about the job creation potential of low‑carbon sectors.

Do you have any data on what the development of the biomass sector might represent in terms of job creation?

[Michael Wolinetz]

We've seen nationally, if we're just talking about the collection and delivery of feedstock to production facilities, that it could be on the order of 20,000 to 30,000 jobs nationally, roughly speaking. I can look for some numbers and perhaps send you something off-line if you'd like.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

How long would it take to create these 20,000 to 30,000 jobs?

[Michael Wolinetz]

It would be over the next 20 to 30 years.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Okay.

Earlier, you said something about biofuel production that made me raise an eyebrow, and I don't know if I understood correctly.

As far as I know, there aren't any projects that involve taking anything other than forestry waste. I've looked into this a little bit, and in Canada there's no project that involves using trees, for example, to make biofuels. Where it becomes advantageous is only if we use forestry waste.

Is that a fair representation of what you're thinking?

[Michael Wolinetz]

From a greenhouse gas reduction perspective and a cost perspective, it is preferable to be using forest residues. That being said, the value of biofuels could rise such that you might be looking at other feedstocks that have less of a positive greenhouse gas impact.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

So we could use agricultural residues, among other things.

Do you feel that the targets set by the Clean Fuel Standard are restrictive enough to develop the biofuels market?

[Michael Wolinetz]

The federal clean fuel regulation, in my opinion, is unlikely to be sufficiently strict between now and 2030 to require agricultural or forestry residues to be part of our bioenergy system. There's enough abatement from first-generation biofuels, from electrification and from carbon capture and storage to comply with that policy over the next nine years.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

What do you think an attractive target for developing the biofuels market would look like?

[Michael Wolinetz]

I think it would be trending toward the requirement in British Columbia or California, for example. Instead of about a 13% reduction in life-cycle carbon intensity of fuels, it would be moving toward a 20% reduction.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you, Mr. Simard. I have to stop you there.

Mr. Cannings, you have about three minutes.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. O'Connor, I want to pick up on the forest waste used to create renewable natural gas, what the life-cycle analysis of that looks like, and how much of a future you see for that aspect within Canada. I know that FortisBC, for instance, is trying to get more renewable natural gas. I have a company in my riding that wants to build two or three of these plants in my riding. They feel they have more than enough feedstock.

Could you talk about the life-cycle analysis for the net-zero aspect of it and about the future of that sector?

[Don O'Connor]

In British Columbia we have this regulation that requires that the forest residues be slash-burned. That burning does not happen very efficiently. We get fairly significant methane and N2O emissions from burning that slash. If we can take those forest residues and use them in a controlled manner to make RNG, we could get a net negative RNG out of that process. Even if we were to use mill residues, the emissions would be probably in the order of one-tenth of what they would be for fossil natural gas.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

So the life-cycle analysis of that whole process would be net zero or negative. Is that right?

[Don O'Connor]

From forest residues, it would be negative.