Evidence of meeting #17 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was need.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Daniel Breton  President and Chief Executive Officer, Electric Mobility Canada
Mark Kirby  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association
Christopher Keefer  President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy
Chad Richards  Director, New Nuclear and Net Zero Partnerships, Nuclear Innovation Institute

4:05 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

What I could quickly add is that we have a number of sites, particularly old, retired coal plants like Nanticoke here in Ontario, that are sitting there with a transmission capacity ready to go. Building nuclear on retired coal sites is a great way to justly transition those workers over.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Thank you.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

We're going to go now to Mr. Simard.

Mr. Simard, you have six minutes.

April 25th, 2022 / 4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Breton.

Mr. Breton, in your presentation, you talked about the federal government initiatives that could be reviewed to foster the electrification of transportation.

I will refer to a study by Oil Change International. This study clearly shows that the federal government champions investment in the oil and gas sector, but has a terrible record when it comes to investing in the renewable energy sector.

I can easily see all the support programs available to the oil and gas industry. One only has to look at the latest budget, which earmarks $2.5 billion to develop carbon capture strategies. However, with the exception of the electric vehicle tax credit, I very rarely see federal initiatives to support the electrification of transportation.

Mr. Breton, I'd like to know if you're aware of any federal programs that support transportation electrification, other than the tax credit we're all familiar with.

4:05 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Electric Mobility Canada

Daniel Breton

Thank you for this excellent question.

I have to say that I'm surprised we're talking so much about producing more energy, whether renewable or nuclear, but so little about energy efficiency and conservation, which we should be talking about more.

Canada ranks first among G20 countries for per capita energy consumption, per capita greenhouse gas emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions from our light-duty vehicles. That means we waste a lot of energy. Before we start producing any new energy, we should focus on wasting less energy and using it more efficiently. That's not to say that we don't need new sources of clean energy, but one thing is clear: We need to stop thinking that we have to keep on producing more. First and foremost, I think we need to waste less.

To answer your question more specifically, I feel it's extremely important to remember that the government has committed to ending fossil fuel subsidies. We hope that happens soon, because we've been hearing about it for many years.

With respect to transportation electrification programs, in addition to the electric vehicle rebate, the government has announced that it will implement net-zero greenhouse gas emissions legislation to persuade people to buy light-, medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles. These vehicles include battery- and hydrogen-powered vehicles.

I started talking to the federal government about transportation electrification in 2006. However, initiatives in this area seem to have been in the works for only two years. In the last two years and past few months in particular, the federal government has announced a number of initiatives for electric vehicle manufacturing as well as battery, cathode and anode plants. So there is still a lot of work to be done.

If we want a just transition, the problem will not be so much creating a transportation electrification industry, because one already exists. In fact, it's even growing exponentially. The problem will be finding workers.

In our view, the problem is we have to ensure we can help current workers and those who are currently studying in high schools, CEGEPs, colleges and universities across Canada to find well-paying jobs. Right now, we're seeing a disconnect of sorts. Workers are losing their jobs in some sectors and can't make the transition to other sectors.

We're discussing the coaching that needs to be done with workers with people from the Unifor union, which is at Electric Mobility Canada.

As we've pointed out, if we want the electric mobility sector to still exist in Canada 10, 15 or 20 years from now, we need to announce that new jobs are being created, but we also need to train workers.

In the announcement in Bécancour just a few weeks ago, they said they need skilled workers. However, you can't just snap your fingers and get trained workers. It has to be planned out with universities, CEGEPs, colleges and high schools.

The federal government's plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions doesn't take the worker training component into account. It's an extremely important aspect that really needs to be emphasized or it will be hard to fill jobs with current workers.

4:10 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Keefer and Mr. Richards.

Mr. Keefer, I saw earlier that you have a passion for nuclear power when you talked about it. I'm a newbie in this area, but what scares me is the waste management. I'm sure you know that nuclear waste is being kept close to a major water source in Chalk River. If something unfortunate were to happen, Montreal Island could be left with no drinking water. I'm not very familiar with waste management, but many people are very concerned about it. How can waste be managed in an acceptable, low-risk manner?

In my opinion, a just transition is about supporting workers in the energy transition, but also not burdening future generations. However, I feel that they will be the ones who pay the price for waste management.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

We're at the end of the six minutes, but I'll give you time for a quick response to that, and then we'll move to Mr. Angus, for his six minutes.

4:10 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

Like I said, this is an issue that does definitely merit a response.

We've been storing spent civilian nuclear waste for 70 years now. In the world's history of storing spent civilian nuclear waste there's not been a single death associated with that. We know how to shield radiation very, very well.

We need a permanent solution. Finland is building a deep geological repository right now. It will be open shortly. As I was mentioning before, the geology is what contains it. We talk about burdening things. We think about civilizational life skills. It's reasonable to say, “Oh my God, 10,000 years. There hasn't been a civilization that's lasted 10,000 years.” We're talking about rock that's hundreds of millions of years old and completely stable, and we understand the characteristics of that rock.

If it takes water a million years to move a metre through that rock, carrying anything that could potentially come out from all of those engineered barriers, it's no longer harmless at that point. We need to be worried about the forever waste out there, the heavy metals, and particularly, the fossil fuels that are continually spilling into our atmosphere and driving climate change.

I know we don't have much time. I'm happy to address this further, but I do think this issue has really been blown out of proportion by anti-nuclear environmentalists who use it as a means to prevent what I think is our most effective climate solution.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Mr. Angus, you have six minutes.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Thank you very much.

I was reading the IPCC reports on nuclear. They're not quite as gung-ho as you are, Mr. Keefer. They raise the serious questions about the risk of proliferation, negative environmental impacts and mixed effects on human health. They talk about the long timeline it takes to actually get one of them up and running. They talk about the risk of accidents and radioactive waste management. Those are the IPCC reports.

I'd like to focus on the issue of proliferation. These small modular reactors are different from CANDU. Mr. Keefer, we're going to be pitching this technology to the global south, where it's possible to extract plutonium.

How are you going to address that issue with regard to the threat of nuclear proliferation?

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

I'm going to pass the question.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

I'm asking you.

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

No, no, I'm happy to answer part of that, but I'm not a nuclear engineer.

Regarding this issue of nuclear energy leading to nuclear weapons, we have some interesting examples. Look at South Korea and North Korea. North Korea, a country with no civilian nuclear program, has nuclear weapons. South Korea, a country that is about 40% powered by nuclear energy—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

I'm asking about our technology, and small modular reactors from which you can get plutonium. They're not CANDU reactors.

Why are we selling them if you can get plutonium from them?

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

Plutonium is created as part of neutrons bombarding uranium-238 inside of reactors around the world. It is incredibly difficult to extract plutonium from spent nuclear fuel.

I'm going to leave that to my—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

I have to go on. I only have six minutes.

I'm just Charlie from northern Ontario, but I'm reading the IPCC reports. They have flagged this as a serious concern.

I want to go to the Toronto Star of April 2 and David Olive. I'm sure you read his article about small modular reactors. He says that with over 20 years still in development, and still in the concept stage, current SMR designs won't achieve widespread deployment until the mid-2030s.

He writes:

By then, they would have been overtaken by improvements in existing clean-energy sources and future advances in biomass, hydrogen and methane-emission reduction.

He says:

SMRs, by contrast, are a boutique technology. Given the urgency of climate crisis, even a modest distraction by SMRs might be an extravagance we can’t afford.

He refers to it as a boutique boondoggle.

Given the fact that we know these other technologies are up and ready to go, why go down this road?

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

You mentioned biomass. Biomass is a terrible source of energy. We're taking land that could be used to grow food, and turning it into fuel. We're turning woodchips into power.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

This is from Mr. Olive.

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

Currently, the largest plant in the U.K. burns four gigawatts of woodchips from South Carolina. To say that biomass is a solution...The SMR we're pursuing here is based on existing technology. It's just a scaled-down version of a larger power plant. This isn't a bogeyman.

We've been operating—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

I did not say it's a bogeyman. I'm saying it's—

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

—boiling water reactors around the world since the 1960s.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

We get told that we're afraid of this. In fact, you told us I could go home and tell my people they could eat uranium. God help us. People in northern Ontario—

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy

Dr. Christopher Keefer

You're misquoting me, Charlie. I did not say that.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

No, you said that we made a mountain out of a molehill over nuclear waste.

4:15 p.m.

President, Canadians for Nuclear Energy