Science and Research Committee on Jan. 26th, 2026

[Francis Bradley]

I would agree that Quebec is one of the regions in this country that are going to be critical. Every region has a different opportunity. The opportunities we see in Quebec are critical and critically important. They are very similar to the circumstances that one would find in British Columbia, for example. Many regions in this country have massive opportunities to take advantage of these already existing massive non-emitting resources.

In the particular circumstance of Quebec, we're also seeing a marrying of wind and hydro, which work extremely well together. We're seeing that deployed in other jurisdictions as well.

When we look to the longer term and into the future and project out beyond 2040 to 2050, if we see greater interconnection among the regions, I could see a future in which Quebec could become the battery for northeastern North America. I don't think they're going to be able to fully take advantage, for example, of offshore wind unless we're able to connect it into this jurisdiction. The same will be true of the west coast; there will need to be interconnections into the B.C. hydro system, for the same reasons, because those reservoirs are incredible resources.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

That answers my question.

To respond to the rapid increase in electricity consumption for AI and productivity, do you think the sustainable solution is to expand fossil fuel development in the west or look to clean, available hydroelectricity in Quebec? You talked about opportunities, but there are also societal choices. What we're talking about right now is a societal choice.

[Francis Bradley]

It probably will not be surprising to members of the committee, given that I represent Electricity Canada and the electricity sector, that my belief is that the future prosperity of this country is going to reside in expanding the electricity sector and using the electricity sector as a motor for growth in the future.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Can we even have a conversation about digital sovereignty in AI in Canada if we don't control the energy that powers our digital infrastructure?

[Francis Bradley]

I couldn't agree more.

I think we're very well placed. Canada is a net exporter of electricity. As a country, we produce sufficient electricity for our own needs, but as we look to the future, we need to be able to ensure that we continue to have that level of sovereignty.

When people talk about the opportunity for Canada to become an energy superpower with respect to electricity and clean energy, Canada already is a superpower in this space. How can we build that? It is going to be the backbone, and needs to be the backbone, of any AI strategy in the future. I keep coming back to the same point, which is that the electricity voice should be at the table when we're developing that national strategy with respect to AI and have an advisory task force on it.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

We will now proceed to MP Mahal for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for both George and Francis.

I think we all have consensus that AI data centres are enormous power users. They use a lot of power. Right now, there is a huge gap between the supply—the power generation—and the demand for it. It will take a long time to build the infrastructure to produce the power that we need. If the demand goes up, what will happen to the price of electricity and what would that mean for average families in Canada?

[Francis Bradley]

In every jurisdiction in this country, there is some form of price regulation. For example, we're here in Ontario. The Ontario Energy Board regulates the price of electricity. It determines what goes into the rate base at any point in time, and it determines how many cents per kilowatt hour are going to be charged to customers. This isn't a completely open, free market where the price will go completely off the rails. There is a level of control in jurisdictions across the country.

The gap that one sees between supply and demand is not one that exists today or tomorrow, but it's going to exist in the very near future. Later this week, there will be the release of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation's annual long-term reliability assessment. That will point to concerns about meeting the demand for electricity in quite a few regions across North America, particularly in periods of extreme weather. For example, today we're meeting all of our electricity needs across the country, but it is not -35°C today. On Saturday, many jurisdictions were pressed and challenged. The gap we're talking about is a gap that will be in the very near future.

The increments that people are talking about—and there's been mention of that already—are concerning when we're talking about increments not of 50 or 100 megawatts, but 300 megawatts or 600 megawatts. Somebody mentioned 1,000 megawatts, which is almost the entire output of Site C dam in British Columbia, which took 25 years to build.

When you're talking about large increments like this, it is very concerning. It isn't a tomorrow issue, but it's an issue within the immediate future.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Do you want to add anything?

[George Christidis]

I would only add—I think we're all saying this, and Francis alluded to this as well—that the importance of the electricity sector in general and the nuclear sector specifically, which is my mandate, is in what it means as an economic foundation point for the country and the number of jobs it creates. It is a significant employer that will create a significant number of jobs: in our case, for large and small nuclear reactors, the ecosystem, the supply chain, uranium mining and the like.

At this critical time, one thing we've learned collectively is that when there is a delay in terms of how to move forward on industrial policy, there's a consequence. We need to move forward to create these jobs and create long-term planning for our infrastructure to meet the needs we know are coming very shortly.

As part of the cost discussion, there really needs to be an understanding of the types of highly skilled jobs that our sector creates. It's everything from skilled trades to universities and the like. They're foundational to the health of the country as we move forward.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Building on that answer, from an investment standpoint, how unattractive has the federal regulatory and permitting environment become for private investment in the nuclear and energy projects needed for AI support?

[George Christidis]

If I understood, the question is about the level of investment that's needed for artificial intelligence.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

How well planned is it right now, considering the regulatory framework we have?

[George Christidis]

Thank you for the clarity.

I think Francis alluded to it. It's hard to speak from the electricity or nuclear sector to how well we're prepared, because from the strategy discussion we've not privy to where that thinking is. I can tell you from the discussions at the provincial level—provincial governments with proponents of projects—there is an ongoing conversation with regard to what that could look like.

In terms of small reactors—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting. The time is up for MP Mahal.

With that, we will proceed to MP McKelvie for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

My first question is for Mr. Christidis.

Getting back to AI research and innovation, what are the big gains we can make? How is this a game-changer, for example, around fusion magnets and other things like that? What is the real potential we have here?

[George Christidis]

With regard to AI as a tool for research or innovation, I think it's very similar in all sectors. It's a means by which...whether it's material research, planning or looking at regulatory processes, whatever it may be, it does represent a significant tool that could enhance and add to a lot of the processes that are used, whether it's university research, etc. I think that, as a tool, it is definitely something the industry is starting to look at, like a lot of different sectors.

If I understood your question correctly, this sector, which is critical, will be an important piece of the electricity and nuclear market as we proceed, as well.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Is there anything more we need to do to fully unleash the potential of AI in the energy sector, in the research space? What should we be pushing the university setting to explore further to make sure the energy industry is ready to update this?

[George Christidis]

Certainly from a nuclear perspective, those conversations within the university network are occurring. We have a nuclear university network called UNENE, for example. It's made up of universities across Canada, so that is very much happening.

It goes back fundamentally to what we were talking about earlier, which is how, as we set up a national strategy, these pieces come together: the electricity infrastructure piece, the research piece and universities. I'd even argue that other spaces need to be part of the conversation.

One of the take-aways here, which I think my colleague alluded to, is the inclusion of these conversations inside the development of an artificial intelligence strategy and data centre strategy for the country.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Bradley, I did take note of your four recommendations, and one of those was to ensure that the energy sector is at the table in this discussion.

I'm wondering if you could comment on the potential for grid improvement and smart grids. How much extra electricity can we unleash with the grid as it is today, for example, by adopting AI? Yes, we could grow the grid and put more energy in it, but just with the energy we have available right now, how much more efficient could we be with smart grids?

[Francis Bradley]

That is a fantastic question. There isn't an easy answer to it, because we're just starting to get an understanding of the use cases of AI and we are beginning to get an understanding of what the potential will be as we get out the other end of this.

There are massive opportunities, when you start calculating. For example, I drive an electric vehicle. It spends 95% of its time plugged in and fully charged and just sitting there. There are hundreds of thousands of electric vehicles across the country. Without even talking about what the future could look like, we could harness that as a storage medium today. The only way we're going to be able to do so, because it's so incredibly complex, will be through tools such as AI.

There are a lot of people who are working in this space. I couldn't tell you exactly how much we would save, but it will absolutely be transformational. We will be able to maximize, in a way that we can't even imagine today, the value of what we currently have in the system, not to mention what we're going to be able to build in the future.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

It sounds like we need AI to calculate the full impact of AI.

My next question is for Mr. Donovan.

You mentioned 1,600 megawatts by 2040 for data centres, which is the equivalent of 1.6 million homes. I toured and was absolutely fascinated by nWave and the ability for cooling. One of my questions was what they do with this cold water in the winter. They said the demand in the winter is just as strong because of the cooling of the centre.

Do we have calculations or do we know what potential we have or what requirements we should be bringing in when a new data centre is sited? Should we be requiring X, Y and Z so that they're minimizing the impact in the draw on the energy production system?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, but your time is up.

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

I think I'm up in the next round, so you'll have six or seven minutes to come up with your answer.