Evidence of meeting #35 for Natural Resources in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was hydrogen.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
I have a quick question for Air Liquide.
What are some of the things you're looking for, for Canada, to make investment into your industry? When you're making an investment in a country, what are you looking for?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Air Liquide Canada inc.
To begin with, looking at the relative capital intensity activity we have, we are looking at stability.
When we decide to make such an investment, it's not for the coming 10 years. It's for—
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
What do you think would cause instability in Canada?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Air Liquide Canada inc.
We have overall relative economic and political stability in Canada, but when you're speaking about stability, stability in terms of rules, when I am making an investment today, I'm not looking specifically at carbon price today. I'm looking at what I expect carbon prices to be in 10 years, 15 years and more. It's the same thing in terms of what are the constraints, and more.
Typically, the things we are currently looking at and dealing with when we are bringing up, let's say, a strategic investment validation process is not only financial elements. It's making sure as well that what we invest today will be sustained and in the market in a 15- or 20-year period of time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Mr. Lloyd. You're right on time.
We will go to Mr. May now for five minutes.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want, first of all, to thank all of the witnesses for being here today. This has been a fascinating study and today is no exception.
Before I ask my question, I have to jump in on one of the previous comments. Specifically, Mr. Zimmer brought up Ontario and the cost of the the transition. The cost is incredibly important, but I think it's important to get on the record the cost of inaction and the fact that here in Ontario we now have one of the greenest grids on the planet with zero smog days in places like Toronto, and of course a whole lot fewer kids having to carry puffers at school.
I'm a firm believer that if you want shade today, you should have planted the tree 30 years ago. I think this is the challenge that we have in front of us, that is, what do we do now in order to be prepared for our future.
Mr. McKitrick—
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
I would just like to clarify that I was very specific in saying I care about the environment, but we don't want to bankrupt the country to do it.
Thanks.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
That's not a point of order, Mr. Chair, and I hope that doesn't take away from my time.
Conservative
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. May said something there that I've never heard before about there being fewer puffers in school now. I was wondering if he could, for the sake of this committee, table that information for us as well.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
—but I think we can definitely have that conversation off-line.
If I could get back to my questions, that would be great.
My question is for Mr. McKitrick.
You talked a little bit about the idea of carbon leakage in one of your answers. I'm wondering, sir, if you could talk about that a little bit more. I'm concerned about the idea that we should be waiting to see what countries like China or the United States do before we set environmental policy. I'm wondering if that's what you're suggesting.
Professor of Economics, University of Guelph, As an Individual
We don't have to wait and see what China or India or even the United States are doing. We can see not only is China building its coal-fired plant capacity, they have enough planned and on the books to exceed the current coal-fired power plant capacity in the United States just with the additional increment. They are also investing—
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Sir, is it your belief then that we should not have gotten rid of coal in Ontario?
Professor of Economics, University of Guelph, As an Individual
Let me go back to that point. You said we don't have smog days. I don't know if you're asserting that's because we phased out the coal-fired power plants, but the province's own analysis of that showed that the coal-fired power plants contributed less than one per cent of the particulate in smog pollution.
They like to promote this idea that Lambton and Nanticoke were the causes of those smog days, but if you look on the Ontario Ministry of the Environment website, they attributed—
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Sir, I have really limited time. I had a very specific yes-no question.
Do you think we should have eliminated the coal plants in Ontario?
Professor of Economics, University of Guelph, As an Individual
No. I think we should have continued the retrofit on them, which was under way at that time, which would have eliminated most of the air pollution from them.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Sir, you also bring up the idea of regulations not contributing to advancements. I was a little bit surprised by that, given, frankly, what we've seen over the last five years, especially in industries like the auto industry where we've seen the complete transition in the auto industry moving toward electrification.
Could you maybe cite some research you were talking about that connects those two things and shows that regulations don't in fact contribute to the advancement of technology?