Natural Resources Committee on April 6th, 2022

[Gitane De Silva]

I'll ask Monsieur Charlebois to answer your specific question about how projections are included in the work done by Environment and Climate Change Canada. I would just point out, in answer to your earlier question, that a price on carbon would be only one of the factors considered in the modelling we do. We can certainly table the whole list of factors with this committee if that would be of interest, so we can ask Monsieur Charlebois to—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Absolutely. That would be helpful. I just wanted to get a sense of whether you guys are at cross-purposes with your prediction and what the government is claiming. I've heard two different stories, one from Mr. Guilbeault, who said he factored it in, and one from Mr. Wilkinson, who said he's sort of sending directions and that he wasn't pleased with it.

Based on your prediction, you're looking at a million-barrel-a-day increase under the evolving policy scenario. So when you look at the plan by Mr. Guilbeault and the government, would that be contradictory to what you're anticipating—that million-barrel-a-day increase?

[Gitane De Silva]

I will point out that our modelling is projections and not predictions. These are models based on a variety of assumptions. I can ask Monsieur Charlebois to explain how we, at the regulator, in the energy information that we generate, work with our colleagues at Environment and Climate Change Canada.

[Jean-Denis Charlebois]

Sure.

As Ms. De Silva mentioned, we make projections based on a series of assumptions. Some of the key assumptions underlying the oil production forecast are that there will be an increase in carbon pricing, which has been announced, and, depending on the scenarios, there will be a continued increase in that carbon price beyond 2030. We also have to make assumptions about the price of oil globally and how it translates with respect to Canadian oil, as well as some of the policies around climate. Then we—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

That's helpful. I get that. I'm sorry but I'm running out time here.

I asked that question because when you came up with your December scenario, the war in Ukraine wasn't on anybody's radar, and that has been a significant game shifter. It was also not really certain whether Bay du Nord was going to go ahead.

That's an extra 500,000 barrels a day that have been added on, but your projection is for a million barrels a day, so based on what you're saying—and I know you don't like to talk off the top of your head—are you looking at this 500,000 barrels as being in addition to the million you were predicting?

[Jean-Denis Charlebois]

We really run two scenarios, one based on current policies and another based on evolving policies. We don't make specific assumptions about whether or not specific projects are coming online. As I mentioned, our production forecast is based on, most importantly, the price of oil, the price of carbon and climate policies that become more stringent, depending—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

That makes perfect sense to me. It's just that in December, the Ukraine war wasn't on anybody's radar. Now we're doing a massive increase, and Bay du Nord hadn't been approved. That would be another 500,000, but you were talking about a million-barrel-a-day increase.

You have two scenarios. One is that it goes up to 6.7 million barrels a day by 2044. The other scenario, which you say is based on lower GHG emission plans, puts us at 4.8 million barrels a day, which is roughly equivalent to where we were in 2019. In that scenario, we're pretty much back where we began. Is that correct?

[Jean-Denis Charlebois]

That's correct to a large extent.

One thing I will add, though, is that you make reference to recent events that have obviously disrupted the global energy system, and the nature of our projections is really for the long term. We're talking about projections to 2050. So as the—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

But the 6.7 million barrels a day that we could be seeing in 2044 could involve uncertainty in global markets and could involve price rises. Regardless of what happens here, we could be looking at a major increase to 6.7 million barrels. However, you're saying that if everything goes based on the government's planning, we will basically have the equivalent amount of energy oil being produced per day in 2050 that we have today.

[Jean-Denis Charlebois]

As Ms. De Silva indicated at the beginning, those are projections based on assumptions we are making. We don't have a crystal ball: We don't predict the future. Instead we run analyses and models that require assumptions. Then our results will indicate whether there is economic value in putting production online.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That brings us to the end of the time we have for today.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Yes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I would like to table the following motion:

That the committee invite again the assistant deputy minister, Environmental Protection Branch, to appear for a period of one hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I thought it was a point of order and you can't move a motion on a point of order.

We were going to suspend and come back for committee business. If you want to do it then, you can.

Garnett.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, will the committee business be in camera—

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Yes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

—or in public?

Okay. Since I have the floor and I didn't acquire it on a point of order—I sought your attention and received the floor—I will respectfully move the motion that Mr. Simard just moved.

I will move that the deputy minister for environment be invited to appear before this committee for one hour and that he may appear either remotely or in person, so that he can avoid the potential technology problems.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Is there any discussion?

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Hold on. I have point of order.

That's cute, but he's responding to a point of order, which doesn't make it appropriate

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I asked for the floor.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

No, you were responding to the point of order raised by Mr. Simard. The chair was kind enough to allow you to talk. We're still dealing with the same issue. It does not change the fact that it's out of order.

Let's end the meeting, go in camera and deal with committee business.

Thank you, Chair.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

That's a totally inaccurate description of what happened, respectfully, Mr. Maloney.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We need to dispense with this one way or another. We will can call the vote.

We have a motion.

Julie.