Natural Resources Committee on Sept. 20th, 2023

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mention in your opening remarks that lithium is another element that's needed in order to make those batteries?

[Raphaël Gaudreault]

It is.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

At present, in order to get the lithium required, where is that coming from? Is there any potential that you see to get that lithium from somewhere domestically, rather than internationally?

[Raphaël Gaudreault]

Yes. There are some lithium mines currently active in Quebec.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

To scale it up to the rate that's needed, how long is that going to take to get this battery production? How long does it take to scale it to where it needs to be?

[Raphaël Gaudreault]

We're looking at, with our project, that once we get the financing, construction is going to be somewhere between 24 to 28 months. Then, of course, there's the ramp-up period, so we're talking a few years before the supply chain can catch up to the battery production.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

That's good. Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Next is Mr. May, who will have two and a half minutes on the clock.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I believe there isn't a path to zero emissions without nuclear. We haven't really talked a lot today about nuclear. I was very excited to participate yesterday in Minister Wilkinson's announcement.

For those in the room or online who aren't aware, Canada has signed an agreement with Romania for CANDU technology. This is a $3-billion loan, and that's billion with a “b”. The agreement calls on the Romanian government to spend that money 100% with Canadian companies and, of course, they have to pay that loan back with interest.

This is a win-win for Canada.

I'm wondering, specifically, Mr. McGowan, if you, first, were aware of this and, second, could speak to the potential impact this might have on the supply chain for Canada. Do you agree that we need to have a much more robust conversation about nuclear in Canada?

[Gil McGowan]

Our coalition that produced our economic blueprint looked at all of the avenues for development that we thought would support our economy and create jobs.

We did look at nuclear. We brought in a bunch of experts to give us advice. We chose not to put it in our final report as a pathway for development, because we didn't think it could be deployed fast enough to address climate concerns. It would create a lot of jobs in construction—there's absolutely no doubt about that—and a lot of good jobs in ongoing operations. Obviously, we're not opposed to that, but this is a very long-term solution. We're talking decades, whereas renewable energy projects can be developed and deployed much more quickly. We already have—well, we had—a large and thriving renewable energy industry.

On balance, we thought that if we wanted to move quickly—which we'll have to do in terms of the climate emergency and our ability to keep up with the unfolding energy transition—supporting our existing oil and gas industry to pivot towards materials that support renewable energy and building out our electrical infrastructure.... Those things were all higher on our priority list.

I'd point out that the Alberta business community put out similar reports to the labour community and came to exactly the same conclusions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Now we're going to go to Monsieur Simard, who will have two and a half minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Mousseau, I want to talk to you about net-zero emissions.

I believe that you, unlike your colleague Mr. Pineault, are not a fan of thriftiness. I know that Canadians account for 20% of emissions. I think I heard you say that, if we want to be successful and reduce emissions by 2030, the best way to do it is to significantly reduce emissions from the oil and gas sector. Is that correct?

[Normand Mousseau]

The Institut de l'énergie Trottier published a study in 2021 titled “Canadian Energy Outlook 2021: Horizon 2060”. The study says that, in order to meet the 2030 targets, in a techno-economic optimization context and because of the timelines, our modelling showed that we would have to reduce emissions from the oil and gas sector by 60% to reach a total reduction of 40% or 45%, as we don't have a solution for transportation, for example.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I don't know if I am associating ideas in a stupid and bad way, but a 60% reduction means, in a way, that we can no longer afford to have new oil and gas projects.

[Normand Mousseau]

We do not feel it is possible, from a structural point of view, to develop CO₂ capture or storage quickly enough to continue to maintain or increase oil and gas production in Canada.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I don't want to appear to belabour the point, but I still want it to be clear, as a report will be prepared on this issue. If Canada wants to meet its targets by 2030, it will be difficult to do so with fairly frequent announcements of new oil and gas projects.

[Normand Mousseau]

That's what we're seeing in our models.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

If I'm not mistaken, in your modelling, you also identify other types of industries that should be decarbonized.

[Normand Mousseau]

Yes. We can talk about the cement sector, the aluminum sector or others, but the problem is that we don't have the technologies to decarbonize those sectors quickly. Oil and gas production is the only sector where emissions can be reduced by decarbonizing.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's the end of those two and a half minutes.

Now we go to Mr. Angus for his final two and a half minutes.

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

I'm just going to ask two quick questions of Mr. McGowan.

First off, in order to make this succeed we need an all-of-government approach. The government's approach to now has been to set up regional round tables. One is in Alberta, with the UCP government and Danielle Smith, who has made public statements that she doesn't believe the transition is going to happen for decades.

The first question is this: How important is it to have energy workers and the communities that are being affected in the negotiations and at the table for regional decisions that are being made?

Second, we hear this talk about retraining, as though workers are being left high and dry. I've been to the IBEW training centre in Edmonton. I've been to the Building Trades centre. Is this an issue of retraining, or is it, in fact, that your workers are trained and ready to go and actually just need more investments so they can build on the skills they have?

[Gil McGowan]

To your first question, it's absolutely crucial to have workers at the table when we're building an IRA-style industrial policy. We have to make sure that workers have input and that they're at the front line.

I would also say it's really important to have their input for political reasons. In order for any of this to work, we have to have a political consensus that supports us. If workers aren't at the table, they're afraid they're going to be on the menu. If they're at the table, they're going to have more confidence that their interests are going to be looked after. That's critical in order to develop the political consensus needed to pull off any of this stuff.

In terms of retraining, I want to make this really clear: We actually have more skilled trades per capita in Alberta, which is going to be the coal face for all of this—pardon the pun. The heavy lifting and the biggest transition will have to be done in Alberta, as we'll have to move workers from oil and gas to other sectors where other opportunities exist. We have more skilled trades per capita than any other province. They have the skills. They have the flexibility. It's not really a question of retraining. It's about creating jobs where these people can take their skills. In adjacent sectors like manufacturing, it's a pretty easy transition.

I really want to speak out against any move towards microcredentialing, dumbing down the trades. We have lots of good people, existing journeymen and master tradespeople, and lots of people in the apprenticeship pipeline. Let's give them work through industrial policy.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's perfect. We're out of time on this one.

With that—

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

I have a point of order, Chair, really quickly.