Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[Alisdair McLean]

Thank you for your question.

The study we did used publicly available data to understand the comparison between offshore wind off the coast of Nova Scotia versus onshore wind projects in Nova Scotia. Our study wouldn't include an evaluation of the comparison in Newfoundland and Labrador.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

I'll ask you the same question that I put to the others.

Would you support an amendment to the bill that prioritizes renewable energy projects over oil and gas projects in the event of a conflict over use?

[Alisdair McLean]

Please remember, Monsieur, that my field is science, not law or legislation, so our view would be that the offshore energy regulator is the correct body to sort out those sorts of issues. We would hope that we might be able to have an opportunity to provide some science or some data to help people make their decisions.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

That's all, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Simard.

We'll now go to Mr. Angus for our final five minutes.

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

Thank you so much.

Chief Paul, I want to begin with you and ask you, because of the importance of sustainability and the obligation that the federal and provincial governments have to work with and have consent with indigenous peoples, do you feel that this process has included the voice and respects the interests of your people?

[Chief Terry Paul]

Yes, I believe so, from what our discussions have been. As I mentioned, we are a player in this industry. We certainly want to make sure, whatever its development, that the project is not only beneficial but necessary, and that it aligns with our values and desire to contribute to the fight against climate change.

I can't speak for all, but in our case, representing Membertou, we feel that they have the consent of the Mi'kmaq.

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

Thank you for that.

Mr. McLean, I want to follow up. I was really struck by the fact that Canada is the only G7 country not in the game on offshore wind. My Conservatives colleagues seem to think that the price is really high and that it's going to be subsidized, but, from what I've been reading, once these projects are up and running, it really drives down the cost of power. Is that not correct?

[Alisdair McLean]

An important part of the offshore wind price advantage is the size of the turbines. They can be much larger than what's possible on shore. We're seeing 16-megawatt to 18-megawatt turbines, so they are an important contributor to the price coming down. What we're seeing in the industry is that those turbines are getting bigger and bigger, so, with more and more experience, we'll continue to see the price come down.

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

I guess the issue is that Canada is sitting on the sidelines; we're arguing, and it's being filibustered here. The U.S. is driving ahead. At a certain point it's going to be hard to get investors. If the cost of what is being produced out of the U.S. is much cheaper, bringing investors here to start from scratch when they are going to be producing low-cost power would be difficult. Not only would it be hard for us to get investors, but they could start to sell excess power. Is that not a concern that we should have in terms of being able to compete?

[Alisdair McLean]

I think the idea of looking at the competition for investment on a global basis is very important. That's why Net Zero Atlantic supports this legislation. We think it's important to get the offshore energy regulators in place so that they can be the focal point for the discussions required by investors coming into the jurisdiction.

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

Thank you.

My final question is for you, Ms. Arnold. We've heard some pretty powerful and emotional testimony from the fishing unions in terms of the impacts of climate change that they're seeing on fish stocks. We saw a letter done by atmospheric scientists who said that the temperatures in the North Atlantic at the beginning of this new winter year were literally, they said, off the charts. We see threats now to the sustainability of the Gulf Stream, the Atlantic lung system.

What are you seeing for Atlantic Canada in terms of the immediate threat from climate change? Where are we going from here if we don't take action on reducing carbon emissions?

[Shannon Arnold]

I mentioned a few things in my presentation. We are seeing it every day, more and more, with increasing storms. As I said, there are species that are moving. That means different impacts for fisheries—who can access those, who gets to fish and where they get to fish.

I think we ourselves are struggling with the balance and complexities. It's calling on us to act with urgency, but we're not ignoring it or pretending that this shift won't be difficult. We all need to sit down and figure that out. We do think that strong planning processes should be required to be able to do that and find that way forward. As you know, climate change is already impacting fisheries, aquaculture and other ways of life. We have to reduce emissions, get off fossil fuels as fast as we can, and not ignore, but take seriously, those concerns.

Things will shift, but we can find ways to codesign research and codesign planning and figure out what our priorities are moving forward to get to clean energy and mitigate some of those impacts as quickly as we can.

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

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you.

I want to thank all the witnesses for joining us today. If you'd like to submit a brief, please do so through the clerk. Thank you for your testimony today and for appearing for the study.

This concludes our hearings regarding Bill C-49. I have a final reminder for our members regarding the committee's study of the bill. As per the updated memo, all amendments, including subamendments, must be submitted in writing and sent to our committee clerk by Wednesday, February 21, 2024, at 4:00 p.m.

Should you wish to propose amendments during the clause-by-clause consideration, please send the legislative counsel, Marie Danik, your written instructions as soon as possible. She will ensure that amendments are drafted in the proper legal format.

We will commence the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill on Monday, February 26.

That concludes this meeting. Is it the will of the committee to adjourn?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

The meeting is adjourned.