Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 16th, 2022

[Bruno Detuncq]

It isn't at all.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

That answers my question. You're a great witness because you answer our questions before we ask them.

I'd like to come back to carbon capture strategies.

As you know, there are two major projects under way in Alberta. These projects will cost $2.5 billion, of which 57% comes from the Alberta government and the federal government. Personally, I have reservations, because I feel that in these situations, the taxpayers are carrying the risk.

Mr. Detuncq, I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

Also, do these carbon capture strategies have a chance of being profitable, both economically and environmentally?

[Bruno Detuncq]

I don't want to comment personally on the economic aspect, but I can refer to the economic and financial analysis research institute report that I mentioned earlier. According to that institute's research, they will not be profitable.

Scientifically speaking, there are other criteria, such as the amount of energy needed to do this landfill work and the potential landfill sites.

Currently, very little relevant work has been done in this area. For the past three or four years, I've been scouring scientific literature for information on the subject. I realized that 85% of all the papers produced were done by people funded by oil companies for the purpose of increasing oil production.

Therefore, nothing leads us to believe that burying CO2 underground carries no risks. The problem is, the risks have not been assessed.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

You stated in your speech that it was like looking at the sky with a microscope.

I'm going to make another analogy. Am I wrong in saying that the technical knowledge we have about carbon burial is eerily similar to what we knew about cancers caused by tobacco in the early 1970s?

It's hard to come by neutral information about carbon burial.

[Bruno Detuncq]

That's exactly right.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

There was not much time there to answer. I apologize.

Mr. Angus, it's over to you for your six minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to thank all the witnesses. This is a fascinating discussion.

Mr. McGowan, I'd like to start with you. Would it be fair to say that the transition we've been talking about for so long is actually already happening?

[Gil McGowan]

It is, without a doubt.

If you took a look at the fossil fuel industry in Alberta as a whole, you'd see that we've already seen the phase-out of coal-fired power, which is something I was intimately involved in as president of the Alberta Federation of Labour. I was also co-chair of something called the Coal Transition Coalition, which was a coalition of unions representing people who worked in the coal-fired power sector, both the plants and the coal mines. Together, we negotiated the first sector-wide just transition package for workers who lost their jobs as a result of that change. That was thousands of jobs already lost.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the number of people working in Alberta's oil and gas sector has already dropped from a peak of about 182,000 directly employed in 2013, and we've lost about 42,000 since then, so it's happening already as a result of the move away from fossil fuels. There's a reluctance of big investors to put money into it, and then there's also the question of automation.

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

Right, and automation is a big issue because we've seen a 17% loss up to 2019. We're expecting more losses, and as companies retool, we're looking to automation.

I want to bring this into focus. I've lived through unjust transitions. I was on one of the last shifts underground in Elliot Lake before we lost 4,000 uranium jobs, and I've never seen a good transition. As I've said, it's U-Hauls leaving in the middle of the night. It's economic disaster usually.

What I find really flummoxing about the situation in the west is that we have such an opportunity to make the investments now to make change. I'm looking at the report from last December from Calgary Economic Development and Global Edmonton. It says there's a $61-billion opportunity for Alberta and 171,000 clean-tech jobs. However, that will necessitate major changes, first of all, in what the province is actually investing in, a major increase, and what would it mean at the federal level, so that instead of having the usual heartbreak stories of shutdowns and people having to leave, we're actually starting this transition now? I don't see that federal presence in a big enough way. What do we need to do to make this happen?

[Gil McGowan]

I think the first thing we have to do is make a commitment to the concept of just transition, which Ms. Carter has already alluded to.

When people talk about just transition, I think some people have different ideas of what it actually is. Some people talk about just transition as adjustment policies for workers who lose their jobs in the affected industries. Other people talk about just transition in terms of future economic transformation.

I just want to make it clear that from our perspective in the Alberta labour movement, when we talk about just transition, we're talking about both of those things. They're related.

In the near term, we need policies for workers who are facing the loss of their jobs. That means training for younger workers, pension bridging for older workers, relocation allowances. These are the kinds of things that we actually negotiated with the previous Alberta government as part of the just transition package for affected workers in the coal-fired power industry. There are lessons to be learned there.

Then there is the bigger question of economic transformation that can generate economic opportunity for people who are displaced, but also for people who are not even in the industry, just to grow the economy.

For that latter part of just transition, I'll be blunt. We need to put money on the table. If our governments at the provincial and federal levels are serious about dealing with energy transformation and providing just transition for workers and regions, we have to think big, in the order of the Marshall plan, the mobilization for World War II, the Apollo moonshots. That means governments have to put a lot of money on the table.

What I am concerned about is that money will be put on the table, but it might be for the wrong things. The oil industry, for example, has asked for $75 billion from the federal government for carbon capture and sequestration. I think we should model that and see where the money would be better spent—on helping to sequester carbon or actually building a transition towards a greener economy.

I think Canadians deserve to know that before our governments start signing cheques.

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

I think that's really important. I want to say that from our perspective in the New Democratic Party, we don't get to a clean energy future without Alberta. We have the potential and we have the skill, but it is going to take a national vision.

We hear about carbon capture and how many billions we're going to keep subsidizing, when we may actually be able to shift that money to much better use, putting more people to work.

How important is it to have the workers at the table in this discussion?

[Gil McGowan]

You can't have a just transition without workers and, I would suggest, a dedicated new transfer from the federal government to provinces that are energy provinces, mostly Alberta, but also Saskatchewan and Newfoundland. We're the ones that are going to make the biggest sacrifices in the transition to a greener economy, and the federal government and other Canadians have to support us through that transition.

That's why I have recommended a dedicated just transition transfer in addition to other transfers from the federal government to affected provinces.

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

I know my time is up, but can you send us notes on anything you have on how you guys see the just transition, so that we can look at it in our study?

[Gil McGowan]

Yes, for sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

On that, to any of the witnesses, if you have additional information, we can take up to an additional 10 pages in briefing material, so feel free to send that in to us based on the conversations we have had today.

We are going to our next round, to Ms. Goodridge.

Welcome. I forgot to mention you in my opening comments. You have five minutes.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you so much.

Thank you to all of our panellists for their remarks today.

I am very proud to be the member of Parliament for Fort McMurray—Cold Lake.

Mr. Podlasly, I really want to thank you and Chief Gale for your remarks. In my region of northern Alberta we have seen a lot of economic reconciliation taking place. I am wondering if you've heard at all about the AIOC, the Alberta Indigenous Operations Corporation, and if you have any thoughts on that.

[Mark Podlasly]

Yes, and I'll be speaking as Chief Gale had to leave.

The AIOC, Alberta Indigenous Opportunities Corporation, is an organization that makes capital available to indigenous organizations at an effective cost, to become owners and to become more integrated into the energy economics in Alberta.

There is a similar program in Ontario. It's the Ontario aboriginal loan guarantee program. It's the same thing. It allows indigenous people access to competitively priced capital.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Do you think that's a good idea?

[Mark Podlasly]

Yes, I think it's a fabulous idea, and as an organization we promote that as a national initiative. It would do wonders for getting capital to indigenous people to invest in Canadian infrastructure.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Fantastic.

If you were to make a recommendation to this committee when you were talking about economic reconciliation, would having a program similar to the AIOC be something that you would recommend?

[Mark Podlasly]

Yes, wholeheartedly.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Fantastic.

Are there any other barriers that are preventing access to capital for indigenous ownership in energy projects?

[Mark Podlasly]

The access to capital is the number one issue for indigenous people wanting to participate in infrastructure on energy, clean energy and other transportation infrastructure in this country, just because of the way the Indian Act has set up indigenous people in this country. We are subservient to a federal act that was not made for a modern energy transition.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I very much want to thank you for the work you're doing. I think it's spectacular. In northeastern Alberta we see what you guys are doing, and we definitely support much of the work that you're doing.

I'll open it up to Ms. Adler.

You touched quite a bit on the idea of having a cap on emissions. I was wondering if you think that we should have a cap on all emissions, using a sector-by-sector approach.