Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 14th, 2022

[Merran Smith]

The positive thing is that when we modelled out how many jobs there would be in the clean energy sector if we followed through on the climate commitments that we had a year ago, we found that there would be a growth of 208,000 jobs. That's a 50% growth. At the same time, there would be a loss in the fossil fuel sector of 126,000 jobs, so you can see that the additional jobs in the clean energy sector far outweigh them.

As I mentioned, these are jobs in every province. They're rural jobs, urban jobs, diverse jobs, blue-collar jobs and white-collar jobs. The potential for this to grow much higher is there, and it's with the focused, targeted, incentives, and investments by this government in things like batteries or green hydrogen.

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

I met with the IBEW workers at their training centre in Edmonton, and they're retooling themselves. They told me they were ready for the new clean energy economy, but where is the government? We have workers with the skill. They're ready, and they know a transition is coming. They're looking for federal leadership, but they haven't seen it.

Where do we need to put those investments now, so that we do not end up with the unjust transition?

[Merran Smith]

As you've said, there are many skill sets that cross over directly from the existing fossil fuel sector to the clean energy sector. We need to invest to get that clean energy sector up and going, whether its with electricity, green hydrogen or battery production.

We're seeing other countries doing this. We're actually seeing great progress in Quebec, landing those types of contracts. The Government of Canada needs to take the funds and target them quickly. We need to send a signal to the world that this is the energy economy that we want to build in Canada.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're going to go now to Mr. Maguire, for five minutes.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the witnesses as well for their presentations today.

Ms. Petrunic, I would like to expand with regard to—

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We lost Ms. Petrunic. She's dropped off with technology problems.

I don't see her back yet, but we're trying to get her back on.

I've stopped the clock.

Can you direct a question to somebody else until we get her back?

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will go then to Mr. Beugin.

We had a previous witness, Dr. Sara Hastings-Simon, who stated:

I think it would make sense to look at other sectors—not necessarily at the same level, though.

Do you agree with this, and if so, what do you think we could do there?

[Dale Beugin]

It's pretty clear that to get to net zero, and to achieve our 2030 and 2050 targets, we need emissions reductions from across the economy and from all sources of emissions. That's also the path to cost-effectively achieving those goals, by making sure we're driving emissions reductions in all corners of the economy.

That's why economy-wide instruments, like carbon pricing, make sense. There's a need to make sure that all emissions are facing policy incentives, and are aligned with each other as much as possible. That holistic view does make sense.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

You mentioned the safe bets that are there now with things like CCUS and others, and you outlined tax credits as a means of supporting those technologies.

You also mentioned predictable decisions. What are the time frames we would need to look at to make these things effective, and can they be done sooner than 2030 or 2050?

[Dale Beugin]

I think we want to be creating as much certainty as possible about where policy is going. That would allow the market and investors to invest where they see fit to drive the innovations and the investments required to deliver on those emissions reductions and achieve those goals. The longer the horizon for policy certainty that governments can provide, the stronger the signals for innovation and the stronger the signals for deployment of those safe bets and the innovation of new wild card technologies.

So we want as long a horizon as is possible in terms of the certainty of future carbon prices and the stringency of future regulations.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

All of this can continue while we're continuing to deal with the emissions cap as opposed to a production cap in oil and gas, as I think you mentioned. Or would you agree with that?

[Dale Beugin]

Yes. I think if you're going to shift to a quantity-based cap on the sector, you want to provide as much certainty as well on the direction and levels of that cap over time. It will mean that there's less certainty about the price of carbon in that sector as a result. That is the trade-off that comes with a cap versus a price.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

If we want to rely on getting technology developments and companies into Canada to develop new technologies, that reliance on predictable decisions is most important. Would you agree?

[Dale Beugin]

I would agree.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you.

Ms. Petrunic, I'm glad you're back.

Fuel consumption accounted for approximately 72% of all emissions in the gas and oil sector. Do you think there are large-scale sources of energy that could replace this energy use in Canada? You alluded to some of the transit opportunities in hydrogen.

[Dr. Josipa Petrunic]

The answer to that question is, yes, those supplies already exist. If we look at the capacity by BC Hydro, Hydro-Québec and the utilities in Ontario alone, they already provide and supply sufficient capacity for the electrification of our transit fleets, just as a start point, let alone coach and rail. Add in energy storage and hydrogen as not just a fuel but also an energy storage device and technology, and you do have the makings already of sufficient capacity in the country for electrification—as long as we can invest in the technology to demand-manage.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I've always believed that Canada could be a leader in technology development. I was just talking to Mr. Beugin about the security of and importance of reliable decision-making processes and consistency in policy to allow that technology to take place in our country. It is taking place in our companies, in our universities and in our colleges.

Can you expand on your thoughts with regard to what we could do there to expand that? I've always believed that we could export that technology and help Canada be a leader in the world and in saving the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. What can you provide us with in regard to your thoughts on technology development, beyond just hydrogen and changing and tweaking the oil and gas industry that we presently have, to be able to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions worldwide?

[Dr. Josipa Petrunic]

Very briefly, policy consistency is pretty critical, especially with carbon pricing for this industry as well, including for export potential.

Even more briefly, Canada is already a leader in fuel cell stack design, electrolysis design, energy storage design and battery electrification integration in heavy-duty powered trains in the automotive and heavy-duty sectors. Ironically, however, if you look at hydrogen as an example, there's not one fuel cell bus on the road in Canada.

So we have a consistent problem in domestic consumption of our own production and innovation in the technology sphere. We are ready exporters, but we certainly are not domestic consumers. That is a fundamental problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're out of time.

We'll now go to Mr. Chahal.

You have five minutes.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll start with Ms. Petrunic.

I disagree with some of my colleague's comments from earlier, that it was the city council delays with the green line. I think the city council has done a tremendous job in supporting BRT with the Max Orange investments and also the investments in the most recent budgets to north Calgary. The delays over the last number of years that have cost the city millions of dollars have actually been from the provincial government, the Conservative government, delaying the green line from being built. It's cost millions of dollars.

Ms. Petrunic, how do we as a convenor ensure co-operation between levels of government so that we don't have unnecessary delays in important transit projects in our cities?

[Dr. Josipa Petrunic]

To be frank, answering a question about municipal delays at a federal committee is always very difficult and full of potential challenges.

To clarify, I agree that Calgary Transit is one of the most innovative transit systems in the country. It's the only one to have solar energy and wind energy powering its LRT, and frankly, that's something that the rest of the country could learn from.

That said, your point is entirely apropos. Alberta is not the only place where the provincial governments have stepped aside from their duty to invest in green and advanced transit systems.

We have examples of very similar scenarios across the country, and I could fill your ear with them in a litany and a Ph.D. exegesis on that problem.

How do we overcome that? The federal government, to its credit, has already started to do that through the $2.75 billion zero emission transit fund. It is direct funding to cities.

I know there are a lot of provinces upset about that, but the reason that exists is because provinces were not moving fast enough to dole out the cash that they got over the last years to do exactly that.

It is a wise move to be able to engage directly with municipalities, because frankly, it's municipalities and their municipal transit and fleet systems that are ultimately going to address climate change the most robustly and most stringently. That said, the continuation of dealing directly with municipalities is important.

I would put forward as a final point that it is time in Canada's history that we seriously take a look at having a ministry and a ministerial portfolio for large cities. We have cities that are unto themselves economies and also GHG emitters and GHG climate action champions. Not having the ability of cities to go right to the federal government, not having a ministerial portfolio for our cities, is a problem. It is a gap. It is something we can address.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you for that detailed answer and for noticing that Calgary is a leader in excellence in using wind and solar in our transit systems.

Ms. Smith, I'll go to you. You touched on the importance of job creation and workers. I also note that the provincial NDP brought in some output-based pricing models and has supported the TMX line provincially, and the Coastal GasLink in British Columbia.

In terms of the creation of those jobs, what other incentives are required to ensure that this job growth, the 200,000 jobs you talked about, does occur?

[Merran Smith]

That's a great question.

I think it's moving forward with all aspects of the different climate policies, whether it's zero-emission vehicle mandates for electric vehicles, which is going to drive people towards electric vehicles and help support electric vehicle production in Canada, or whether it's building standards and codes, which is going to drive people to retrofit their homes and create more jobs for insulators, electricians and others.

The clean electricity standard that the government is committed to is going to help build out our clean electricity system across the country and create jobs there, whether it's in solar or wind or other renewable electricity production, but also in transmission lines and other aspects of that.

Moving forward on buildings, on transportation, on electricity and energy, on every aspect is what's needed to develop those jobs. There's no one silver bullet. There's no one policy that's really going to drive this change and drive the job growth. It needs all of them.

The price on carbon has been extremely successful in sending that signal. That does help create the innovations you were talking about and the technology, which also helps create jobs.

Just so you know, Canada does punch way above its weight on technological innovations for the size of our population. British Columbia, where I live, actually punches way above its weight as a province. Often about half of the Global Cleantech awards out of San Francisco every year are from British Columbia, and it's said that's directly attributed to the carbon price here and has driven innovation.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're out of time on that round.

Just so everybody knows, including our panellists, we have one more round that I think we can easily fit in here, with the first two members going for five minutes, and then the last two for two and a half minutes. That will give us 15 minutes. That will take us to where we need to be for going in camera for some committee business.

To start us off with this round, we'll go to Ms. Rempel Garner for five minutes.